Sign in to follow this  
gnidir

Saints - Play the ball

Recommended Posts

Just watching the game down here in NZ and im wondering if Saints have been getting away with playing the ball like this all season?

 

Wigan aren't much better, but it looks like touch, with them making no attempt with the foot. Is this common in the Superleague these days?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just depends on topic of the month for the referees controller.   They pick on one area that needs cracking down on and award a penalty at every play the ball.   At some point last season penalties were coming thick and fast for the foot not touching the ball, but after about a month it was back to normal.   Recently it’s been contact with the head, a fingertip brushes someone’s bald spot when he’s lay on the floor and it’s a high tackle.   Something else will be targeted next month.

Saints are just clever enough to know when each fad has expired and take advantage.

Edited by Desert Skipper
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way it’s reffed in SL is as long as the player makes an attempt to ptb then it’s ok. The sooner we go back to having to ptb with the foot the better. Having said that it’s only been back in the NRL this year and possibly last so it shouldn’t really be something new for an NRL fan. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the Op that it was more noticeable with Saints last night.

But so was the cynical tripping and holding down from Wilkin and lying in the ruck in many tackles.

They are a team who have no issues whatsoever with cheating, and they get away with it.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I agree with the Op that it was more noticeable with Saints last night.

But so was the cynical tripping and holding down from Wilkin and lying in the ruck in many tackles.

They are a team who have no issues whatsoever with cheating, and they get away with it.

Funny you’ve not mentioned the flailing around like a fish out of water by Liam Marshall trying to cheat to win a penalty with no players around him or Sam Tomkins’ sticking knees into the heads of players regaining their feet for the play the ball. 

Now, I’m not Saints are angels but to castigate one team over others is silly and wrong. Every side does plenty of little things. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Funny you’ve not mentioned the flailing around like a fish out of water by Liam Marshall trying to cheat to win a penalty with no players around him or Sam Tomkins’ sticking knees into the heads of players regaining their feet for the play the ball. 

Now, I’m not Saints are angels but to castigate one team over others is silly and wrong. Every side does plenty of little things. 

Well this thread is about Saints, start one on Wigan or Marshall and I will happily criticise his actions from last night. His play acting is everything that I dislike about the game at the moment. I'd happily describe him as a cheat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also seemed to me that Saints got away with not standing straight at the PTB on quite a number of occasions. However, on at least one occasion, that old Saints standby, the hidden forward pass, was detected by the ref. The hidden forward pass is when the ball is passed forward between two players who are close together, masking the refs view of the ball. Its a regular Saints play....and it normally works.

Edited by JohnM
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Funny you’ve not mentioned the flailing around like a fish out of water by Liam Marshall trying to cheat to win a penalty with no players around him or Sam Tomkins’ sticking knees into the heads of players regaining their feet for the play the ball. 

Now, I’m not Saints are angels but to castigate one team over others is silly and wrong. Every side does plenty of little things. 

If you're going down that route you will need to include Amor and LMS throwing themselves to the floor at every opportunity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Well this thread is about Saints, start one on Wigan or Marshall and I will happily criticise his actions from last night. His play acting is everything that I dislike about the game at the moment. I'd happily describe him as a cheat.

Could be after next Thursday we could be very well starting one on The Wire, 

"Let the one without sin cast the first stone" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

It seems the Wigan fans have taken last nights defeat much harder than the coach did.

Only one Wigan fan posted on this thread AFAICT.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JonM said:

Only one Wigan fan posted on this thread AFAICT.

True Jon, I had just been reading the match thread prior to this one, it all seems to congeal into the same mass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

It seems the Wigan fans have taken last nights defeat much harder than the coach did.

It looks to me like the fire of passion has gone out in Wane. Five years ago, in a game like that, he would have been beating his chest on the sidelines, visibly calling Hicks a #### and telling his team to get in the ref's face.

Now it is all very magnanimous. You get the impression he is after a Wenger-style farewell tour through the Super Eights where fans of all sides emotionally wave him off into the union wilderness, engraved silver salvers all round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Could be after next Thursday we could be very well starting one on The Wire, 

"Let the one without sin cast the first stone" 

Same point. Start a thread on Warrington and I will happily discuss them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

It looks to me like the fire of passion has gone out in Wane. Five years ago, in a game like that, he would have been beating his chest on the sidelines, visibly calling Hicks a #### and telling his team to get in the ref's face.

Now it is all very magnanimous. You get the impression he is after a Wenger-style farewell tour through the Super Eights where fans of all sides emotionally wave him off into the union wilderness, engraved silver salvers all round.

Hilarious comments, and of course a load of old horlicks.

On the original (sensible) comment, the play the ball rule should be reinstated. If so it will then at least hold our heads up when criticising RU for the way they simply promote/play the ball back by hand in the ruck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PTB is what makes our game different to union for me. The coaches and the powers that be have ruined it. We should revert back to the correct technique immediately and never allow it to be bastardised again.

Edited by jacksy
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jacksy said:

The PTB is what makes our game different to union for me. The coaches and the powers that be have ruined it. We should revert back to the correct technique immediately and never allow it to be bastardised again.

Out of interest, what, in your opinion (or others' opinions), is "the correct technique"?  I ask in genuine innocence because it seems to me that the PTB has evolved over many decades.  To confirm my suspicions, I just looked on YouTube at the opening few minutes of the 1965 Hunslet -v- Wigan cup final.  At least four techniques were all used without the referee intervening to penalise any of them.  They were

  1. stand, facing forward, place the ball on the ground and heel back with the foot;
  2. stand facing forward, drop the ball between legs and play with the calf or achilles heel area;
  3. as 1, but stand sideways; and
  4. as 2, but stand sideways.

The thinking in using either 3 or 4 may have been to make it more difficult for the defender at the PTB to swing his leg through in an attempted strike at the ball.  Option 2 also probably made it more difficult for a defender's strike to succeed in legally disrupting the PTB for the team in possession.

Would your 'correct' technique include allowing the defender to strike for the ball?  If not, why not?

I suppose I pose these questions because there is a danger that some might think that there was a 'correct' PTB technique for a very long time and then it has recently changed, perhaps for the first time since the PTB's introduction which was, I think, in 1906 (or was it 1908?)  The evidence of the sort I have cited refutes any such belief.

Over to you!

Edited by Wiltshire Warrior Dragon
spelling and punctuation errors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was playing junior RL at the same time as the slightly older current SL players and it was common - if not necessarily coached - to start rolling the ball back with your hand while you were in the movement of placing the ball on the ground when getting up from a tackle and then catch it with your foot as it rolled backwards to the dummy half. The current situation is just a progression of what players will have been doing throughout largely their entire time playing RL in search of a quick PTB. As much as a consistent level of penalties might held as an initial deterrent, it's the sort of habit that can be traced right the way back to their junior development so there needs to be efforts right back to the start of the scale to make sure that the 'proper' method is coached right the way through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly couldn't care less about proper technique of playing the ball. It's such an uninteresting part of the game it's not under-officiated it's over-officiated. Stand up get it behind other and get on with the running and passing bit that's good to watch.

Honestly I'd let players drop it and just carry on if they step over it. Who cares.

I cannot seriously believe anyone has ever attended a game and come away talking about the part where the man rolled the ball back with his foot as the bit they enjoyed.

Edited by scotchy1
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I honestly couldn't care less about proper technique of playing the ball. It's such an uninteresting part of the game it's not under-officiated it's over-officiated. Stand up get it behind other and get on with the running and passing bit that's good to watch.

Honestly I'd let players drop it and just carry on if they step over it. Who cares.

I cannot seriously believe anyone has ever attended a game and come away talking about the part where the man rolled the ball back with his foot as the bit they enjoyed.

I can see a good reason for the player having to regain their feet and place the ball cleanly without dropping it.

Beyond that, I agree. As WWD says, when you look back at old footage you see the ptb was always a mess, and many of the old ptbs from the 60s and 70s would be ruled as clear knock-ons today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wiltshire Warrior Dragon said:

Out of interest, what, in your opinion (or others' opinions), is "the correct technique"? 

Simples.

Stand, face forward, place the ball on the ground, play it to the acting half with the foot.

The defensive line thus takes its cue from a stationary ball being played backwards with the foot, not - as sometimes happens under our current messy PTB - with the tackled player putting his hand on a grounded ball while upright.

Subtle but important difference.

I also think the British game's PTBs cheapen the sport and, as the OP says, makes it look like touch.

I would add that 'proper' PTBs as above would reduce knock-ons at the ruck, which can also make the game look bad.

Edited by Man of Kent
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Wiltshire Warrior Dragon said:

Out of interest, what, in your opinion (or others' opinions), is "the correct technique"?  I ask in genuine innocence because it seems to me that the PTB has evolved over many decades.  To confirm my suspicions, I just looked on YouTube at the opening few minutes of the 1965 Hunslet -v- Wigan cup final.  At least four techniques were all used without the referee intervening to penalise any of them.  They were

  1. stand, facing forward, place the ball on the ground and heel back with the foot;
  2. stand facing forward, drop the ball between legs and play with the calf or achilles heel area;
  3. as 1, but stand sideways; and
  4. as 2, but stand sideways.

The thinking in using either 3 or 4 may have been to make it more difficult for the defender at the PTB to swing his leg through in an attempted strike at the ball.  Option 2 also probably made it more difficult for a defender's strike to succeed in legally disrupting the PTB for the team in possession.

Would your 'correct' technique include allowing the defender to strike for the ball?  If not, why not?

I suppose I pose these questions because there is a danger that some might think that there was a 'correct' PTB technique for a very long time and then it has recently changed, perhaps for the first time since the PTB's introduction which was, I think, in 1906 (or was it 1908?)  The evidence of the sort I have cited refutes any such belief.

Over to you!

The foot must contact the ball for me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

I can see a good reason for the player having to regain their feet and place the ball cleanly without dropping it.

Beyond that, I agree. As WWD says, when you look back at old footage you see the ptb was always a mess, and many of the old ptbs from the 60s and 70s would be ruled as clear knock-ons today.

It's just breaks up the game so much and the fact we are so officious about it means players mess about and we see loads of penalties for knock ons that don't really go forwards, the ball having a little wobble when it hits a good, we see defenders encouraged to leave the hand in it get close to try and put them off.

Just get on with it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I honestly couldn't care less about proper technique of playing the ball. It's such an uninteresting part of the game it's not under-officiated it's over-officiated. Stand up get it behind other and get on with the running and passing bit that's good to watch.

Honestly I'd let players drop it and just carry on if they step over it. Who cares.

I cannot seriously believe anyone has ever attended a game and come away talking about the part where the man rolled the ball back with his foot as the bit they enjoyed.

There is a double issue. 1. The rule is that defenders should roll or clear away the ruck and not lie on or obstruct.  2. The other side should stand up and (in my view) and take the necessary time to play back the ball, with the foot. The latter idea being allowing a modest amount of time for the defence.  In the former, the attackers can play the ball quickly before defenders can retire to the gain line.

The principal action and responsibility should be on the defence to clear the ruck area, but the attackers sadly do con refs for getting a penalty.  FWIW... a 'foul' against either infraction should be penalised by either an addition or a deduction to the tackle count. The ref can still give a penalty or yellow card at his discression and also give a team warning. (Like I said... FWIW. !!!)

In the good old days we could contest the (old rule) ruck, this is now a mess because of all the waffting around at the (new fangled) ruck.

The other point, which goes against the defence is that the first up attacker is right up by the ruck where as in the past they were (possibly?) 5 yards back.  In my opinion however it's bad attacking play for the 1st receiver to be stood still whilst taking the ball. This of course takes us back full circle to where the defender delays the ruck and thus the attackers movement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


League Express - Online Now

League Express - Every Monday



Rugby League World - Aug 2018

Rugby League World - Aug 2018

Rugby League Books On Sale Here