NRL back to one Ref confirmed + rule changes (Merged Threads)

[Rupert Prince]

23 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

TJs have less authority now anyway.  

I think it states in the media statement that it will give more ‘surveillance’ using referees so that, imo, is a vote of no confidence to TJs - unless they are re-training them. 

I'm guessing that top TJs do referee at lower levels (?)

[Rupert Prince]

10 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Never sympathised with the hostility towards so-called wrestling. There is a legitimate contest over how quickly the ball can be played, involving technical play from ball-carrier and defenders, founded on principals establishing when the tackle is complete, how tacklers can be onside etc. We lose all that if we try to make every PTB the same, and see it as nothing more than a means of bringing the ball into play. The ball is in play throughout the tackle and ruck. We already see far more calls of "Held" than there used to be. If we lose all respect for the ruck contest, eventually we will have glorified Touch Football with initial heavy contact.

This is a fair point.  It is a 2 man ruck... Or rather a 1 a side ruck. But these days the attacker cannot  strike at the ball.

This all comes down of course to the limited tackle rule.  Given that a defender only has to make 6 tackles they do not strictly need to contest the ruck.    Agsinst this is the 10m (Or 11 yard!) line, and so whilst there is no contest, the defender has every incentive to delay, not seriously contest, but delay, the ruck... So the defence can get on side.

Quick ruck ball is of course possibly devastating if the attack are in support and in motion. And this intelligent and quick service should be rewarded in some way and not obstructed.

[unapologetic pedant]

17 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

Not sure were to start with this one mate, but I don’t think it’s hostility, more frustration.  Certainly, whoever are the best wrestlers will dominate providing there are enough of them and it’s a times and controlled takedown to the ground, followed by a timed release of each defender.  

The PTB should be the same, or close to the same and increase calls for ‘held’ (I don’t know the stats, just on your comment) will be more to do with Refs trying to speed the game up.

TBH it’s a dogs breakfast of a post.

 

When a ball-carrier loses momentum in the contact, he looks to find the floor, and tacklers look to delay him finding the floor before the tackle is complete. If you regard this contest as unfair when there is more than one tackler, you`re really arguing for Rugby Union. The ball-carrier in League has always had to battle against the odds, but the good player will succeed and win the right to play the ball more quickly. Also, how a player goes into contact, picking an angle, identifying space, isolating defenders, factors like these determine how the tackle and ruck develop. It`s integral to forward technique especially.

The increased calls of "Held" are only partly connected to a desire to speed the game up. They derive sometimes from a ref`s failure to correctly read the tackle. The rulebook states that the upright tackle is complete when there is neither momentum in the contest nor any chance of promoting the ball. There`s many a late offload allowed by a good ref that would be prevented or rubbed out by one too keen to prematurely call "Held".

[The Future is League]

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/players-will-be-punished-for-milking-six-again-under-new-nrl-edict-20200515-p54tgl.html

[dkw]

Great rule, they really need to start policing the attacking teams antics at the tackle more as its as bad as the messing around by the defending side now. Coaches need to be held to account also, they are the ones pushing these tactics.

Its the biggest blight on the game at the moment, and for me its been made even worse by watching old games and the speed and flow of the game being much better. 

[Gooleboy]

About time, wonder what will happen to the dedicated wrestling coaches some Clubs have.

[Lowdesert]

3 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

When a ball-carrier loses momentum in the contact, he looks to find the floor, and tacklers look to delay him finding the floor before the tackle is complete. If you regard this contest as unfair when there is more than one tackler, you`re really arguing for Rugby Union. The ball-carrier in League has always had to battle against the odds, but the good player will succeed and win the right to play the ball more quickly. Also, how a player goes into contact, picking an angle, identifying space, isolating defenders, factors like these determine how the tackle and ruck develop. It`s integral to forward technique especially.

The increased calls of "Held" are only partly connected to a desire to speed the game up. They derive sometimes from a ref`s failure to correctly read the tackle. The rulebook states that the upright tackle is complete when there is neither momentum in the contest nor any chance of promoting the ball. There`s many a late offload allowed by a good ref that would be prevented or rubbed out by one too keen to prematurely call "Held".

Not sure how you come to that opinion mate regarding RU.  

Certainly agree that there are multiple reasons for ‘held’ being called but I would genuinely like to know the stats that says this has increased.

 

[Man of Kent]

All eight ‘opening round’ fixtures are on Sky the weekend after next.

 

 

[Man of Kent]

Make that all 16 games of the first two rounds 

https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/news/12202/11988912/nrl-16-games-to-be-shown-live-on-sky-sports

[unapologetic pedant]

Seen a couple of Channel Nine items covering the changes. Nobody specifies precisely what they mean by "wrestling". I had been assuming it referred to protracted contact before the tackle is complete, yet most of the clips shown to illustrate the supposed problem are of second efforts after the tackle is complete, where the tackled player has regained his feet or raised the ball and his upper body from the ground. Since either of these movements require an immediate release, and signal the start of the next play, any extra contact is already illegal and always has been. Indeed, in the clips, penalties were awarded. So what are the changes intended to address?

Best guess is that Peter V`landys has scant understanding of the RL tackle and ruck. He`s just picked up on negative comments about wrestling, and has a vague desire to speed the game up.

[DeadShotKeen]

Have to say I'm a bit stunned by this. NRL being back before the other contact sports is such a positive development and opens the sport up to tons of new global audiences. So what do they do? Choose this time to pick a thoroughly needless internal fight. WTF? Quite apart from the fact that we're mid season (yes 2 games does constitute that, not literally but figuratively) I don't really see the need for the new rules. If there's one thing NRL doesn't really need it's to be speeded up. It's breathless as it is. And I always liked the 2 refs. It shows an additional scrutiny and respect for the laws. So they occasionally contradict each other and seniority can be hard to gauge? I will take that in light of those benefits. I suspect the refs like the back-up as well - it seems to contribute to their relaxed on-field demeanour and help the dialogue with the players, who surely also benefit.

How many commentary angles are going to be wasted discussing these new rules to an audience only just learning the basics of the sport? Did anyone senior within NRL think of that? The timing is quite unbelievable and suggests an ulterior motive to me. Both changes - as with any mooted changes - are valid topics of discussion but should have entered consultation and amateur level trials in the off-season.

With the great strides and bold decisions NRL has taken in the last 30-40 years I always assumed it was immune to the rugby league curse of needless tinkering and internal strife but just as the world's eyes are on the sport for maybe the first time ever in a meaningful way this proves me wrong.

I hope I'm overreacting but I think this will go down as a poor moment for the league and the sport. I also think the refs are right to challenge it and hope they succeed in making those responsible see the error of their ways. It's not too late to show common sense and park these discussions for the off-season. Get the refs back on side and let's all take a time out. Please while we have a chance to show the world how good this sport is let's just get on with the version we know and love. 

 

[DeadShotKeen]

On 14/05/2020 at 11:03, MattSantos said:

How will the ref determine whether its six again in continued play or a penalty?

Why is there more subjectivity being introduced?

Exactly my thoughts. They've made the ruling more subjective and put more of a spotlight on the 1 person making that subjective decision, while removing an extra pair of eyes to assist with the decision making.

Err....

Farcical stuff that can only realistically end in chaos and players repeatedly blowing up. Maybe this would settle down in time with familiarity of the new rationale and a little consistency but why choose this time to navigate those choppy waters? It's beyond crazy.

[THE RED ROOSTER]

On 17/05/2020 at 12:38, unapologetic pedant said:

Seen a couple of Channel Nine items covering the changes. Nobody specifies precisely what they mean by "wrestling". I had been assuming it referred to protracted contact before the tackle is complete, yet most of the clips shown to illustrate the supposed problem are of second efforts after the tackle is complete, where the tackled player has regained his feet or raised the ball and his upper body from the ground. Since either of these movements require an immediate release, and signal the start of the next play, any extra contact is already illegal and always has been. Indeed, in the clips, penalties were awarded. So what are the changes intended to address?.

The style of play in the NRL is built around defence around 10 years ago  the idea of two referees was to stop the wrestling of opponents on the ground and speed up the game,. Asit was put to me by "Dally Messenger" (the one that posted on here not the Dally Messenger) it was an NRL solution to an NRL problem. International League rules are decided by the governing bodies so one ref stays in place.

As this NRL season will always have an asterisk next to it. its an opportunity to experiment and judging by the lack of comment from Nine and Foxtel the broadcasters knew about it. Still with sydney being like a goldfish bowl when it comes to League you can count on there being a media beat up on it until the game starts again on the 28th May.

[unapologetic pedant]

2 hours ago, DeadShotKeen said:

Have to say I'm a bit stunned by this. NRL being back before the other contact sports is such a positive development and opens the sport up to tons of new global audiences. So what do they do? Choose this time to pick a thoroughly needless internal fight. WTF? Quite apart from the fact that we're mid season (yes 2 games does constitute that, not literally but figuratively) I don't really see the need for the new rules. If there's one thing NRL doesn't really need it's to be speeded up. It's breathless as it is. And I always liked the 2 refs. It shows an additional scrutiny and respect for the laws. So they occasionally contradict each other and seniority can be hard to gauge? I will take that in light of those benefits. I suspect the refs like the back-up as well - it seems to contribute to their relaxed on-field demeanour and help the dialogue with the players, who surely also benefit.

How many commentary angles are going to be wasted discussing these new rules to an audience only just learning the basics of the sport? Did anyone senior within NRL think of that? The timing is quite unbelievable and suggests an ulterior motive to me. Both changes - as with any mooted changes - are valid topics of discussion but should have entered consultation and amateur level trials in the off-season.

With the great strides and bold decisions NRL has taken in the last 30-40 years I always assumed it was immune to the rugby league curse of needless tinkering and internal strife but just as the world's eyes are on the sport for maybe the first time ever in a meaningful way this proves me wrong.

I hope I'm overreacting but I think this will go down as a poor moment for the league and the sport. I also think the refs are right to challenge it and hope they succeed in making those responsible see the error of their ways. It's not too late to show common sense and park these discussions for the off-season. Get the refs back on side and let's all take a time out. Please while we have a chance to show the world how good this sport is let's just get on with the version we know and love. 

 

I like your point about "additional scrutiny and respect for the laws". I would add to that elucidation of the laws, because the cajoling and admonishments the pocket ref gives to the players, not only forestall penalties, but also provide a far better education to viewers of the technicalities of the RL tackle and ruck than anything you hear coming from the commentary boxes. One ref 10m back in the defensive line is not able to perform this function to the same standard.

Given that round 2 is where we left off, when watching any of those 8 games, it never for a second occurred to me that the product needed major surgery to it`s rulebook. So where has all this come from, and what has it got to do with a virus-enforced break in the season?

[unapologetic pedant]

2 hours ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

The style of play in the NRL is built around defence around 10 years ago  the idea of two referees was to stop the wrestling of opponents on the ground and speed up the game,. Asit was put to me by "Dally Messenger" (the one that posted on here not the Dally Messenger) it was an NRL solution to an NRL problem. International League rules are decided by the governing bodies so one ref stays in place.

As this NRL season will always have an asterisk next to it. its an opportunity to experiment and judging by the lack of comment from Nine and Foxtel the broadcasters knew about it. Still with sydney being like a goldfish bowl when it comes to League you can count on there being a media beat up on it until the game starts again on the 28th May.

When referring to "wrestling", there has to be a distinction between contact before the tackle is complete (which is legal), and contact after the tackle is complete (which is illegal). If the former is to be outlawed, this will require a change in the law determining when a tackle is complete. It has always been when the ball or the ball-carrying arm reach the ground. If this is changed it will have fundamental unintended consequences. If the current law remains the only way to limit so-called wrestling before the tackle is complete is for refs to call "Held" to players on the ground as they now do to players still on their feet. If this happens I suspect more tackles will be called complete upright, before the ball-carrier can be brought to ground, and we will move to something which is less a contest, more a series of training drills.

[DeadShotKeen]

Latest on this is that a decision via arbitration will be made over the weekend, although it sounds as though the NRL are still talking to the refs and I guess there is the possibility of some kind of agreement being made one way or another without the need for this arbitration.

This clip is well worth a look - 8 mins approx and the 1st half is ex-players (Gallen, Sterling and Fittler) all in favour of the changes and slating the refs (?), whilst the 2nd half is Aussie RL journos taking the opposite view and IMHO talking a lot more sense.

 

I think the ex-players are looking at this through rose-tinted specs. There's a real "Everything was better in the olden days" kind of vibe about their commentary, which I find quite depressing. I just can't understand why any serious RL fan would think NRL needed changing so drastically or be so hostile towards referees simply for standing up for themselves (and why there is so much acrimony towards them generally). It's a very depressing state of affairs.

I'm totally backing the refs on this one. Obviously I don't want to see them take strike action but I hope they stick to their guns and force an outbreak of common sense in this V'landys character and the other leading NRL players.