BCRL Video Kelowna Roosters v Abbotsford Griffins

[deluded pom?]

http://www.rugbyleaguehub.com/2017/06/12/canada-bcrl-round-2-kelowna-roosters-vs-abbotsford-griffins/

 

[Kayakman]

Just now, deluded pom? said:

http://www.rugbyleaguehub.com/2017/06/12/canada-bcrl-round-2-kelowna-roosters-vs-abbotsford-griffins/

 

Thats a great video and from the Pacific Ocean side too...I'm telling you DL this country is ripe for League.

[deluded pom?]

Who the Hell is DL?

[Futtocks]

Many thanks for this! I'll be watching it as soon as I have the time.

[Kayakman]

Just now, deluded pom? said:

Who the Hell is DL?

Sorry ...DP sorry....just a little scattered today..got alot of balls in the air... please forgive me!

It was typo error like Trump did with couffe or something last week.  Once again sorry.

[deluded pom?]

No problem Canoeman.

[Kayakman]

 

Just now, deluded pom? said:

No problem Canoeman.

You are too funny Deluded Pom...tooo funny!

Here is my next technical question.  After a tackle the player with the ball attempts to rise and if the other guys impede him for too long its a penalty and a new six...I get this...however sometimes he is flopping around like a small mouth bass in a canoe, and the announcers say the ball carrier has 'earned' the right to get up quickly.  How is this 'right' earned...do his shoulders have to be square...is it if there is only one tackler...why is this right earned sometimes but not at other times?.  Please explain...that is my question.

[deluded pom?]

You will sometimes hear the ref shout (yes I know he shouts a lot) dominant or surrender or something like. If the ball carrier pushes defenders back he is seen as the dominant one and is allowed a quick play the ball. If he does, any offside defenders inside the ten metres who get involved in the next tackle will be penalised. The ball carrier has earned the right to play the ball quickly. However if the defender(s) forces the ball carrier backwards they are seen as the dominant one and the ref will allow the defence more time to set (usually a couple of more seconds). Hope this helps.

[Kayakman]

56 minutes ago, deluded pom? said:

You will sometimes hear the ref shout (yes I know he shouts a lot) dominant or surrender or something like. If the ball carrier pushes defenders back he is seen as the dominant one and is allowed a quick play the ball. If he does, any offside defenders inside the ten metres who get involved in the next tackle will be penalised. The ball carrier has earned the right to play the ball quickly. However if the defender(s) forces the ball carrier backwards they are seen as the dominant one and the ref will allow the defence more time to set (usually a couple of more seconds). Hope this helps.

Thankyou that does clear things up...so if the ref doesn't use his judgement equally for both sides Ii imagine someone would want to kill him...totally his personal discretion then?

[deluded pom?]

53 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

Thankyou that does clear things up...so if the ref doesn't use his judgement equally for both sides Ii imagine someone would want to kill him...totally his personal discretion then?

The problem with RL laws is that there are too many grey areas that are left to the ref's interpretation. Are you aware that there are actually three sets of laws? The ones used in the SL, the ones used in the NRL and the international laws. They aren't totally different obviously but there are certain differences that won't help when a ref goes from one set to the other.

[Kayakman]

25 minutes ago, deluded pom? said:

The problem with RL laws is that there are too many grey areas that are left to the ref's interpretation. Are you aware that there are actually three sets of laws? The ones used in the SL, the ones used in the NRL and the international laws. They aren't totally different obviously but there are certain differences that won't help when a ref goes from one set to the other.

I did not know that except that the Aussies had a different rule...seems odd...they should get together and clean that up clealrly.

[deluded pom?]

3 hours ago, Kayakman said:

I did not know that except that the Aussies had a different rule...seems odd...they should get together and clean that up clealrly.

The problem is that Australia think RL started in 1908 (when they took the game up) rather than 1895 (when we created the Northern Union which became the Rugby Football League. Because of this belief and their dominance at international level they unilaterally change the rules that they want to play without consulting anyone else. The RFL have also now decided to bring in rules that aren't used in the NRL so we need a third set of laws to find the middle ground. Everyone with half a brain knows the laws need cleaning up so we're all singing from the same hymnbook. Unfortunately the people who are responsible for running RL (be they British or Australian) struggle with this concept.

[Kayakman]

13 minutes ago, deluded pom? said:

The problem is that Australia think RL started in 1908 (when they took the game up) rather than 1895 (when we created the Northern Union which became the Rugby Football League. Because of this belief and their dominance at international level they unilaterally change the rules that they want to play without consulting anyone else. The RFL have also now decided to bring in rules that aren't used in the NRL so we need a third set of laws to find the middle ground. Everyone with half a brain knows the laws need cleaning up so we're all singing from the same hymnbook. Unfortunately the people who are responsible for running RL (be they British or Australian) struggle with this concept.

Well thank God the Canadians are involved now...don't worry, once the Wolfpack get established and the Wolverines start to make their mark we will fix up this problem...leave it with us.