Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Man of Kent

Play-the-ball clampdown

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, RL does what Sky says said:

The problem is just where would all these referees come from ?

To cover all the matches would obviously require double the number of referees able to control those games and so that would mean promoting many from just below that level. However, would you expect a Championship player to just be put into a Super League team and immediately perform to the same standard ? I doubt it. No, it would take time for him to adjust ... yet would coaches, fans give that referee time to adjust ? Again, no.

Furthermore, even if several were promoted, who takes their place at the lower level ... and then the level below that ... and so on ? Eventually what will happen to the amateur matches where no referees are then available due to all having been promoted into a higher level ?

As with players; it's easy to provide more referees in Australia because the game is far more popular and there are more willing to do the job, whereas over here there is already a vast shortage of officials resulting in some amateur matches already taking place without one.

Absolutely - the questions you pose are pretty much exactly what a thread on here discussed when it was first announced the other year. It's kind of a sad indictment of the elite northern hemisphere game that the reason we can't make the game better is because we don't have enough referees, don't you think? That said, it's not hard problem to solve - SL only has 6 games every weekend and usually over 4 days. In the short term we do have enough refs to have 2 each game, it may just mean some have to a Thursday and Sunday game for example. FWIW I don't think it was anything to do with a lack officials that got this shelved in the end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our National team has often struggled with slightly different rules in internationals.  Some, the NRL have already implemented and their players see much more comfortable, while we get caught out.  Some of these minor differences are important at that level.

There has to be uniformity.  Teaching kids, the ball is played correctly.  Teaching coaches, the ball is played correctly.  This adherence to the Rule (its not a change ) just cleans it up and ball carriers will need to be switched on to doing it instead of concentrating on stepping over, charging into defenders or stepping sideways.  More to this area than just the actual PTB.

Regain your feet.  PTB.  imo, it’s no drama at all......rhymes too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Absolutely - the questions you pose are pretty much exactly what a thread on here discussed when it was first announced the other year. It's kind of a sad indictment of the elite northern hemisphere game that the reason we can't make the game better is because we don't have enough referees, don't you think? That said, it's not hard problem to solve - SL only has 6 games every weekend and usually over 4 days. In the short term we do have enough refs to have 2 each game, it may just mean some have to a Thursday and Sunday game for example. FWIW I don't think it was anything to do with a lack officials that got this shelved in the end. 

We are obviously on the same wavelength with this and if it was viable then I think it has shown in that it might be a good idea.

That said, as has been a recent discussion in this forum about players having too many matches in a season (and coaches moaned because they just once had to play two in four days at Easter) then the same could also apply to referees ... especially if that schedule was for every week of the season. That could eventually produce "burn out" of the official and/or also them not having a freshness about the game, which could then lead them to not being on top form every match.

Currently there are 10 full-time referees employed by the RFL and it's also got to be remembered that it wouldn't just be the two referees on the field but that a top official is also often required for video referee duties. Any other positions are filled by part-time officials who are also relied upon to control amateur matches - and that is my main concern ... that if the professional game continue to use more officials (as they already did by wanting two in-goal judges at each of their matches) then there won't be enough referees available at the lower levels.

If so then I fear that newer referees will be fast-tracked through the system and up to a level they have not yet really got the experience for, which will then maybe put them off doing the job and thus we might lose them entirely.

It is the same problem I wrote about in another thread on here concerning players in this country. In Australia the game is massive and thus many more people are willing to get involved (players, coaches, referees and even fans) but it just hasn't got the same appeal in the UK and we have to "cut our cloth" accordingly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Padge said:

Do you remember what scrums were like 40/50 years ago. They were an appalling mess.

 

Yes, but at least during a scrum you could go to the bar, get a pint, retake your seat and not have missed any play.????

  • Haha 1

Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hurrah . Was totally ridiculous to see the obsession with speed at the ruck turning the ptb into a complete farce

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Hurrah . Was totally ridiculous to see the obsession with speed at the ruck turning the ptb into a complete farce

It does seem over the past years that making the game faster has become a priority (to make it look good on tv| yet at the expense of playing the game as it should be ... and what those proper fans who actually attend matches enjoy.

To quote the late, great Muhammad Ali .... "What's my name ?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

It does seem over the past years that making the game faster has become a priority (to make it look good on tv| yet at the expense of playing the game as it should be ... and what those proper fans who actually attend matches enjoy.

To quote the late, great Muhammad Ali .... "What's my name ?"

I for one never understood that thinking.  What peabrain ever thought that a game which moves so fast that defenses don't have time to get set and consequently offenses can make easy metres without needing much skill would look good on TV anyway?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

I for one never understood that thinking.  What peabrain ever thought that a game which moves so fast that defenses don't have time to get set and consequently offenses can make easy metres without needing much skill would look good on TV anyway?

Do you know, in all the time I’ve been into RL, I’ve never thought of it like that. But it’s true, things can get too fast and teams can artificially make a lot of metres from this alone. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

Do you know, in all the time I’ve been into RL, I’ve never thought of it like that. But it’s true, things can get too fast and teams can artificially make a lot of metres from this alone. 

It's a similar situation in cricket. Those involved with tv think that the masses will be attracted to the game by showing matches involving lots of sixes and teams scoring plenty of runs ... yet in last year's World Cup the best matches were considered those which actually had less runs scored  (The final being one of them).

20-20 is not cricket played as it should be; whereas quick play-the-balls and getting the ball in and out of the scrum faster is not Rugby League.

I have had such a view for ages ... hence why I chose my name on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Those in favour of the scrums say it takes 12 players out of the action for a while and opens up space on the field. Yet, for how long ? Within 1 tackle they are all back in position and in that time there has been very rarely any significant open play.

Either get scrums contested or do away with them.

You’re right. The argument that a scrum reduces the number of defenders is negated by the simple conclusion that stuff all scoring opportunities are taken from the first play of a scrum. 

Scrums at present are irrelevant. 

I think that is why the NRL have come up with the new rule for scrums to be formed at the infringement in any width of the pitch within 20m from touch. I anticipate this will result in a few more try scoring situations from a scrum than we have seen for the last 20 years, at least giving some relevance to a scrum.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This new application of the laws instantly reminds me of pre-season amble that “both feet must be on the line when defending on your goal line” and Ashley Kline’s subsequent penalty-a-thon in game one.

That both feet on the goal line lasted about 6 weeks if I recall...

The coaches and players have to be on board. 

In saying that, play the balls in UK have been atrocious for some time now. Should be a little easier to resolve.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Do you know, in all the time I’ve been into RL, I’ve never thought of it like that. But it’s true, things can get too fast and teams can artificially make a lot of metres from this alone. 

A very good point and some teams have mastered it.  So they should.  

I cant honestly see it being a penalty fest.  Refs should have a balanced view but I doubt fans will, especially if a last minute penalty for a PTB offence happens.  

Surely we will think of something more innovative to announce than a rule adherence/change though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took the NRL about a week to adapt . It really isn’t that difficult a skill to master . Play it properly and any terrible one is easy to pick up by refs . Players do it terribly just because they can . It had infected the game completely so needed sorting . It’s not minor it has a whole effect on the ruck and gives it more structure , defensively and offensively . Next thing put  the onus back on the ball carrier and unless it’s a blatant reef if you lose the ball hard luck , knock on 

Edited by DavidM
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RL does what Sky says said:

I have had such a view for ages ... hence why I chose my name on here.

Out of interest, to what extent do you think Sky have been responsible for the way the game is refereed in this country?

Share this post


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

Out of interest, to what extent do you think Sky have been responsible for the way the game is refereed in this country?

Not refereed as such but the way the game is now played. For me it appears that it has become a game mainly to entertain a tv audience rather than those who are "aficionados" of it and that certain aspects have been disregarded because they are not really understood by many of those watching from their armchair and who just want easy-to-watch entertainment without having to know much about it.

As I said before, it's the same with cricket. Many who just watch 20-20 wouldn't know (and wouldn't WANT to know) any difference between a googly and a yorker; they just want a couple of hours entertainment and a winner at the end of that ... yet I suspect most true cricket fans would prefer Test Matches even though they are of much slower pace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Not refereed as such but the way the game is now played. For me it appears that it has become a game mainly to entertain a tv audience rather than those who are "aficionados" of it and that certain aspects have been disregarded because they are not really understood by many of those watching from their armchair and who just want easy-to-watch entertainment without having to know much about it.

As I said before, it's the same with cricket. Many who just watch 20-20 wouldn't know (and wouldn't WANT to know) any difference between a googly and a yorker; they just want a couple of hours entertainment and a winner at the end of that ... yet I suspect most true cricket fans would prefer Test Matches even though they are of much slower pace.

I understand your 20-20 analogy (I love test cricket), but that is a completely different version of the game while test cricket still exists so it is not a perfect comparison. 

I'm keen to understand how much you feel Sky have directly influenced how our sport is played rather than those within the game themselves deciding the direction we should take?

Share this post


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

I understand your 20-20 analogy (I love test cricket), but that is a completely different version of the game while test cricket still exists so it is not a perfect comparison. 

I'm keen to understand how much you feel Sky have directly influenced how our sport is played rather than those within the game themselves deciding the direction we should take?

Yes Test cricket does still exist despite 20-20 but would the latter have come into being if it wasn't for the tv companies wanting a more entertaining game for a tv audience ? I doubt it.

Cricket, of course, is a national game and therefore there is scope for the two forms of it (or even three with the one-day matches) yet RL has not got the same profile to, for example, have a separate 9s competition which could be promoted on tv in a similar way and in which faster aspects of it could be used. Therefore I believe they have had to introduce such ways into our existing product.

Therefore I feel that because Sky want their customers to enjoy RL but without them having to really understand all the rules and regulations they have encouraged those in charge of our game to assist with that aim.

One way, of course, that Sky (or any other relevant tv company) have directly influenced RL is with the introduction of the video referee.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm vey much in the minority, but I can't say I'm too concerned whether a play the ball is made with the foot or rolled back with the hand. As long as it's clean, it doesn't bother me.

I'd rather see a ball rolled back with the hand rather than several penalties a game for failing to use the foot. I think the impact on the game is negligible really.

For years at a professional level the ball hasn't been played with the foot, so it will be interesting to see how it is enforced. If strictly enforced, you'll see 20+ penalties a game based on years gone by.

What is interesting is when you watch junior matches at half time, all the kids play the ball with the foot. I wonder at what point that stops in a player's career?


Twitter: @TrylineUK
Latest Blog: SOCIAL MEDIA REACTS: Grand Final 2020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Chris22 said:For years at a professional level the ball hasn't been played with the foot, so it will be interesting to see how it is enforced. If strictly enforced, you'll see 20+ penalties a game based on years gone by.

If strictly enforced you’ll see one or two penalties per game at most...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chris22 said:

I'm vey much in the minority, but I can't say I'm too concerned whether a play the ball is made with the foot or rolled back with the hand. As long as it's clean, it doesn't bother me.

I'd rather see a ball rolled back with the hand rather than several penalties a game for failing to use the foot. I think the impact on the game is negligible really.

For years at a professional level the ball hasn't been played with the foot, so it will be interesting to see how it is enforced. If strictly enforced, you'll see 20+ penalties a game based on years gone by.

What is interesting is when you watch junior matches at half time, all the kids play the ball with the foot. I wonder at what point that stops in a player's career?

I feel that if one aspect of the game is ignored just to make it appear faster then it could lead to other such instances.

In fact another one that came in a few years ago was when players didn't have to put the ball on the floor for a tap kick. Just what is the point now anyway of a player lifting his foot up to touch a ball that is in his hands ? It might as well just have to be a pass rather than touching it with his foot.

I don't think many penalties will be given for not playing the ball with the foot because surely if one or two are given against them then a team should learn not to do it ... and if they don't then they deserve to get penalised.  If the coaches are doing their job properly then they should be having training sessions getting their players used to doing it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Johnoco said:

Working purely from memory (so could be wrong with dates etc) but I seem to remember the first game of the 2006 season was Saints v Hudds on Sky. There was a big uproar on here and elsewhere about the ‘new laws’. It seemed to last a few weeks before being abandoned ( in true RL style) 

Not sure why it will be any different this time round.

Wasn’t just the ptb that clamp down was that the refs would call every penalty. With no using their discretion to manage the game that’s why games became unwatchable. I think the game you’re on about had 30 odd penalties in the first half. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

This new application of the laws instantly reminds me of pre-season amble that “both feet must be on the line when defending on your goal line” and Ashley Kline’s subsequent penalty-a-thon in game one.

That both feet on the goal line lasted about 6 weeks if I recall...

The coaches and players have to be on board. 

In saying that, play the balls in UK have been atrocious for some time now. Should be a little easier to resolve.

It lasted all season we then went into an international series were all our players were still doing this even though under international rules you didn’t have to. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About bloody time,the play the balls are in disgrace,it`s one of the fundamentals of the game,playing the ball with the foot. No doubt the refs were told to turn a blind eye,but it only takes one or two games of conceding penalties for the issue to sink in. The game will be just as fast. The scrums need sorting out now,all this standing around waiting for the thirty seconds to go by is so frustrating as a spectator. No committee meetings,just get on with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

Our National team has often struggled with slightly different rules in internationals.  Some, the NRL have already implemented and their players see much more comfortable, while we get caught out.  Some of these minor differences are important at that level.

There has to be uniformity.  Teaching kids, the ball is played correctly.  Teaching coaches, the ball is played correctly.  This adherence to the Rule (its not a change ) just cleans it up and ball carriers will need to be switched on to doing it instead of concentrating on stepping over, charging into defenders or stepping sideways.  More to this area than just the actual PTB.

Regain your feet.  PTB.  imo, it’s no drama at all......rhymes too.

Players know how to ptb lol

They roll.it.because it's faster and gives the attack more time against retreating defences 

Coaches will train there players to bend any rule they can to get an advantage 

Coaches are the problem 

Edited by aj1908
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...