JWK

The laws of the game are perfectly clear in terms of the actions by both defenders and attackers but for some reason the referees in super league have chosen for several years not to enforce these.As far as I am aware the 6 again was brought in to stop an endless flow of penalties if the refs did penalize infringements and speed up the game.From memory there was a total of 3 or 4 in the two semis and grand final which is ridiculous by any standard.The refs in the nrl have possibly become over zealous but I would argue the games are far faster and largely more entertaining than those in super league where the classic 5 drives and a kick has become the norm against set defences The nrl grand final was as entertaining a game as you are ever going to see. To me this is a main reason why we struggle to find running creative halves and hookers where quick ptbs create openings.

1970

For anyone who is interested there are 20 odd minutes of the gb v australia game at Headingley on you tube.Priceless commentary from Ediie Waring on the lines of.There is a bit of turmoil early on you can expect a bit odf a caffuffle among the forwards off the ball particularly if the ref isn't looking.A lot of the incidents are clearly off the ball and not on the film but interesting to see how different the game was back then.

I started this discussion and my main gripe is that because of the slow rucks in super league to my eyes the games have become much more predictable and quite frankly boring compared to most of the ones I watch in the nrl where there seems to be a much greater prevalence of runs from acting half and the ball being shifted wide which results in more variation in terms of how teams attack from different parts of the field.Besause rugby league has been my preferred sport for about 50 years I stick with it and just grumble about it like most people do of my age but I really am not sure if there is enough to keep new casual viewers coming back for more.Teams like Leigh and Hull kr have increased their fan base because of the upturn in fortunes they have had over the past few years but even as an ardent fan of the game there appears to be fewer games where open attacking play is the name of the game which is what ultimately keeps people entertained.Many games seem to get into the inevitable grind of the classic 5 drives and a kick rinse and repeat as I have said in a previous post we got rid of scrums to speed up the game and have replaced them with rucks which at time appear to be slower than a scrum would take.I found a piece by Phil Bentham from back in February where he was saying that it is in the hands of the players to dictate the speed of the ruck and that basically the refs will only intervene if one side is gaining an unfair advantage by spoiling tactics which seems crazy as are sides going to wait 3 or 4 sets where the opposition is slowing them down in the hope that the ref will intervene or do they as appears to happen now just do the same thing themselves and the whole thing slows down.

Looked up the teams for the 1970 world cup final and for people of a certain age the gb pack was Dennis Hartley,Tony Fisher,Cliff Watson,Jimmy Thompson, Dougie Laughton and Mal Reilly.If you wanted 6 guys in your corner during a brawl they would probably be some of the first names on the list.

October 1970 Gb v Australia world cup at Headingly which GB won 11-4 A few weeks later went Headingley for the final which Australia won 12-7. It was known as the battle of headingley and recall it being a complete brawl from start to finish .Looked it up 14 players cautioned and 2 sent off. Those were the days!

Apologies it wasn't my intention to suggest that but was in response to the opinion that the ref had a great game.Some rules are subjective and open to interpretation and they can only give what they see.Offsides and forward passes must be a nightmare for them but where I started this was regarding ptb and ruck speed.The rules specifically state the tackler shall immediately release the tackled player and he should not be touched again until he has played the ball which is not open to interpretation and in just about the one action in a game that is in clear view of the referee.If the perceived wisdom is that the referees should be able to put their own interpretation on this change the laws of the game.

Not sure how failing to apply the clear rules of a sport can be construed as having a great game as it kept the game flowing.It's a bit like saying a cashier on a supermarket till should let every fourth customer through without paying in the interests of keeping the queues down.

The post by corvusxiii was exactly what made me raise this in the first place.I used to look forward to watching most of the games on sky if I wasn't attending a live game whoever was playing while I now watch the nrl games most weeks but have become fairly selective in terms of super league.If you don't have a vested interest in terms of the outcome a lot of games are unfortunately pretty tedious.Notwithstanding the number of penalties and set restarts in the nrl grand final the game was spectacular by any standards and would have surely engaged anyone who had never watched the game before.

I don't understand the argument from fans regarding refs ruining the game.If players know rules will be enforced as they are in the nrl by and large players stop trying to bend/ break them and the intervention by referees by definition becomes less throughout the game for the right reasons.Also I have no idea how a team that has been transgressed against can be said to have received an unfair advantage. Agree wholeheartedly about the flop we got rid of contested scrums years ago to speed up the game and slightly tongue in cheek it could be argued there are sometimes nearly as many players in ruck as scrum.

Yes it was like a football referee threatening to penalize a defender for handball next time he did it.Bizarre.

I am a first time poster but things have really come to a head for me over the past two seasons and felt I had to express my feelings on a forum to see if I am in the minority.No doubt someone will correct me if I am wrong but having watched the two semis and grand final in total there were two 6 again calls by the referees. This was less than the number given in the first ten minutes of the NRL grand final which was as good a game as you are ever going to see.To me it is incredibly simple if players know they are going to be penalized they will stop messing about and the whole game speeds up.During live commentary refs call faster next time which came to a head on Saturday when Harry Smith not only didn't immediately release the attacker but stood behind him as he tried to play the ball.Liam Moore's response was clear the ruck next time Harry.The rules are clear and in no way open to interpretation so I simply do not know why there is a conscious decision not to enforce them.I have been watching and championing rugby league since I was a teenager in the mid 1960's watching around 50 live games a season for a large chunk of the intervening years and I am honestly not sure I would be engaged by the game if I was a casual viewer today.A great deal of money has been spent with IMG which will be wasted if the actual product on the field isn't allowed to be the best it can be by allowing players to express themselves with quicker rucks and more broken play rather than the 5 drives and kick against fully set defences which is the current situation in 80 % of just about every match.During replies to the topic regarding the upcoming test series officials somebody said, may be tongue in cheek, slow rucks will give england a better chance of beating the aussies.Is that really what the game is meant to be about?