Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bearman

More Australian innovations

41 posts in this topic

That's not the rules.

There are the "Laws of the Game", but they bear only a vague resemblance to the laws of the game as it is played.

In my view, the PTB should be done properly. If a defending team is penalised for slowing down the PTB illegally to gain an advantage then the attacking team should be penalised for trying to speed it up illegally.

If the rule is going to be that the PTB involves rolling the ball back under your foot with no requirement to touch it with your foot, then that's what the rule should state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was listening to a Rah Rah game (Sarries v Quins) on the wireless at work t'other day and Brian Moore was lambasting the referee for not applying the laws of the game, particularly in the scrum, and saying that they are thus spoiling the game. So refs are much the same in both codes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been a definite change in the way this season's NRL is being refereed. Finally they're addressing the play the ball, and in particular hand on the ball by the tackler. The number of penalties for this has been noticable in the first few weeks. I think that the end result will be more of each match being played in the red zone, and so possibly more tries. Aside from excellent defence, low penalty counts and slow PTBs are a factor in lower scoring games.

One area I'd like to see cleared up is the business of lending weight, which occurs in most if not all games. It seems that it's not ok to lend weight in the act of scoring a try, but it is ok in the act of preventing a team mate being taken into touch. Case in point Eels v Warriors - Thomas Leului try disallowed as player helped him to the ground, then not 5 minutes later an Eels player (can't remember who) is being forced to the side line (not dragged) and Loco, the Eels centre, virtually tackles his own man to stop him going out - result = PTB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule where your not allowed to play the ball forward anymore.

Not allowed to play the ball forward to yourself that is, but simply touching it forwards by accident then heeling it backwards - what rule/law/regulation does that break?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not allowed to play the ball forward to yourself that is, but simply touching it forwards by accident then heeling it backwards - what rule/law/regulation does that break?

Its breaks no rule but now seems to be a knock-on or a scrum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not allowed to play the ball forward to yourself that is, but simply touching it forwards by accident then heeling it backwards - what rule/law/regulation does that break?

Just to be clear, an accident does not get an exception in the rules (and laws are rules too, a strange thing for people to wrongly make a fuss over). The ball should be placed or dropped on the ground then must be heeled backwards, if it is knocked forwards then it is an incorrect play-the-ball. While referees and their controllers may chose an "interpretation" of letting it go unpunished, it is illegal in the rules by virtue of being a deviation from the prescribed manner of putting the ball back in play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not allowed to play the ball forward to yourself that is, but simply touching it forwards by accident then heeling it backwards - what rule/law/regulation does that break?

Probably none but as Steve May states the law book is out of date and is not accurate to how the game is played now. My guess is they penalise ot firstly to tidy the PTB up. The PTB/tackle is also the most important part of the game so maybe it's in there for a bit of balance so that attacking teams have to have a bit of control. If they rush it and make a mistake they are penalised.

Doesn't the law book also state that you should place or drop the ball at the PTB. You wouldn't get away with dropping it anymore but it's there.*

* that's if it is still there and they haven't up dated it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You wouldn't get away with dropping it anymore but it's there.*

* that's if it is still there and they haven't up dated it.

Just to be clear, you are right. It is still there, and it would be interpreted as a knock-on. But the rule book also still defines the attack and defence territorially rather than by possession, it is long overdue being properly updated and various interpretations codified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, you are right. It is still there, and it would be interpreted as a knock-on. But the rule book also still defines the attack and defence territorially rather than by possession, it is long overdue being properly updated and various interpretations codified.

Now that would be fun. I'd love to see the threads on here when/if that task is undertaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that would be fun. I'd love to see the threads on here when/if that task is undertaken.

I think it should be done as a matter of urgency, and I think it would be brilliant fun on here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, you are right. It is still there, and it would be interpreted as a knock-on. .

Would or should?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not allowed to play the ball forward to yourself that is, but simply touching it forwards by accident then heeling it backwards - what rule/law/regulation does that break?

No - not alowed to play it forward full stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've actually suggested to Cummings in the past that we should review all the laws to see whether we still need them - especially at the ptb. We started from a 16 man scrum, worked our way through a contested two man scrum to where we are today.

Had we started from the uncontested two man scrum we have now, would we have had all these rules ? Probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, you are right. It is still there, and it would be interpreted as a knock-on. But the rule book also still defines the attack and defence territorially rather than by possession, it is long overdue being properly updated and various interpretations codified.

Do you not feel like an annoying Pillok after a while saying "just to be clear"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More rules from oz, apparently it is ok to hold on to your opponent in the scrum after the ball is out, not allowing them to get back onto the line, creating gaps for the backs...

Slaters first try should not of been allowed imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel Anderson is in charge of refs in NRL and as such is adopting his philosophy if trying to make the game as quick as possible. Discouraging a hand on the ball is one big step for Oz as its always been a tactic that's been overlooked by the officials. The most frustrating thing for me in the SL is the problem we have with players moving off the mark to get a quick PTB, Tomkins and Ryan Hall are probably the worst for it, taking a large step forwards or sideways as they are getting up. Winds me up no end and the refs end up penalising the markers for not being square.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017