Six-again klaxon

[The Phantom Horseman]

Apologies if I have missed any announcements about this. Last year when the new six-again/set restart rule was brought in for interference at the play-the-ball, a klaxon sounded " to aid in communication with players and others at the ground."

This proved really important for TV viewers, though, as the ref is not always in shot when he makes the signal.

However, in the two Championship pre-season games I've seen, there has been no klaxon. Does anyone know if that's just because the games were friendlies, or is that rule not applying below SL?

The reason I ask is that there were definitely several six-again sets in the games I saw, but unless the commentator spots it (which has tended not to happen, and a lot of the Championship games are going to be commentated on by relatively inexperienced guys) you're not really any the wiser as a viewer and it definitely impacts on your understanding of what's going on, especially if you try and count the tackles, as many fans do.

[Northern Eel]

18 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

Apologies if I have missed any announcements about this. Last year when the new six-again/set restart rule was brought in for interference at the play-the-ball, a klaxon sounded " to aid in communication with players and others at the ground."

This proved really important for TV viewers, though, as the ref is not always in shot when he makes the signal.

However, in the two Championship pre-season games I've seen, there has been no klaxon. Does anyone know if that's just because the games were friendlies, or is that rule not applying below SL?

The reason I ask is that there were definitely several six-again sets in the games I saw, but unless the commentator spots it (which has tended not to happen, and a lot of the Championship games are going to be commentated on by relatively inexperienced guys) you're not really any the wiser as a viewer and it definitely impacts on your understanding of what's going on, especially if you try and count the tackles, as many fans do.

Noticed that in the Fev v Batley game this weekend. Well, I say I noticed, I just thought the ref couldn’t count, but now you mention it, it all makes sense. It had never crossed my mind. 

[Rupert Prince]

The 6 again idea has to be the most stupid idea ever invented.  

Leaving aside the hair trigger margin of error that the ref has to decide on, it encourages soft tackling and easy walking forward of the mark... what we should allow is some competition at the ruck.

 

[Tommygilf]

42 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

The 6 again idea has to be the most stupid idea ever invented.  

Leaving aside the hair trigger margin of error that the ref has to decide on, it encourages soft tackling and easy walking forward of the mark... what we should allow is some competition at the ruck.

 

No we really shouldn't 

[corvusxiii]

Do we think that the ball carrier lunging forward to gain a yard causes a lot of problems at the ptb? It forces the markers to engage because the ref is unlikely to penalise for walking off the mark and then a nothing penalty for interference. 

[The Blues Ox]

Like PH said in the two games I watched the rule was used but the commentators did not notice and there was no audible signal. I thought the rule should have been used a lot more than it were though in both the Fev and Fax games and I hope its not a sign of things to come as I think its a great rule to speed up the game and it is going to catch teams out that have planned around 20 minute impact players.

[unapologetic pedant]

44 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

No we really shouldn't 

Depends on how we define the competition. A lot of people, including putative experts in the media, fail to distinguish between before and after the tackle is complete. As illustrated by all the allusions to "wrestling".

[Tommygilf]

13 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Depends on how we define the competition. A lot of people, including putative experts in the media, fail to distinguish between before and after the tackle is complete. As illustrated by all the allusions to "wrestling".

I don't want to see 3 players trying to rip the ball off of 1 attacker no more than I want to see "competitive" rucks.

[Oxford]

Oh dear another one of those arguments

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, corvusxiii said:

Do we think that the ball carrier lunging forward to gain a yard causes a lot of problems at the ptb? It forces the markers to engage because the ref is unlikely to penalise for walking off the mark and then a nothing penalty for interference. 

It is a real bug bear of mine moving really quite far off the mark. Its one of the reasons the 10m defensive line is often closer to 7m on occasion.

[unapologetic pedant]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't want to see 3 players trying to rip the ball off of 1 attacker no more than I want to see "competitive" rucks.

If a team want to limit the danger of the ball-carrier being held up by 3 defenders, they should be more creative pre-contact. Dull play should not be given impunity.

 

46 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

It is a real bug bear of mine moving really quite far off the mark. Its one of the reasons the 10m defensive line is often closer to 7m on occasion.

And yet it often seems more of a bugbear for commentators when the ref sends the tackled player back to the mark.

League Tag is good in this area of the game. The defender throws the tag down on the mark, then owns the space in front. If the tagged player moves beyond where the tag is on the ground, it`s clearer for the ref to call.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

3 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

The 6 again idea has to be the most stupid idea ever invented.  

Leaving aside the hair trigger margin of error that the ref has to decide on, it encourages soft tackling and easy walking forward of the mark... what we should allow is some competition at the ruck.

 

It stops people lying on and slowing the show down. It's a great rule 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, unapologetic pedant said:

If a team want to limit the danger of the ball-carrier being held up by 3 defenders, they should be more creative pre-contact. Dull play should not be given impunity.

Being held up isn't dangerous, in most aspects it encourages a quicker play the ball, its having 2 or more players able to strip the ball from a single attacker in a tackle that would serve absolutely no purpose.

3 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

And yet it often seems more of a bugbear for commentators when the ref sends the tackled player back to the mark.

League Tag is good in this area of the game. The defender throws the tag down on the mark, then owns the space in front. If the tagged player moves beyond where the tag is on the ground, it`s clearer for the ref to call.

Tbh I've not noticed that as a major feature of any commentator.

In some aspects its self correcting/punishing anyway as the attacker is reducing the space his team have to play with in front of the defence. My dislike comes from when it basically takes the marker out of the game by either pushing them over or worse playing the ball at their side.

[DI Keith Fowler]

2 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

It stops people lying on and slowing the show down. It's a great rule 

I was under the impression that it was widely well liked and seen as a real positive? Any way to reduce stoppages for silly penalties and increase fatigue that can lead to gaps is good in my book. 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, DI Keith Fowler said:

I was under the impression that it was widely well liked and seen as a real positive? Any way to reduce stoppages for silly penalties and increase fatigue that can lead to gaps is good in my book. 

I think the point made by the OP is that it needs to be clearly communicated

[DI Keith Fowler]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

I think the point made by the OP is that it needs to be clearly communicated

Yeah sorry I was replying to Bedfordshire Bronco who was responding to Rupert Prince who doesn't like the rule. 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

Yeah sorry I was replying to Bedfordshire Bronco who was responding to Rupert Prince who doesn't like the rule. 

Yeah I know, I'm with you I like the rule a lot and think most fans are in the same boat, but I can see why if it isn't communicated well that fans will get confused and maybe even irate.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

5 minutes ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

I was under the impression that it was widely well liked and seen as a real positive? Any way to reduce stoppages for silly penalties and increase fatigue that can lead to gaps is good in my book. 

I think it is by most people 

Obvioulsy not all! 

[unapologetic pedant]

9 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Being held up isn't dangerous, in most aspects it encourages a quicker play the ball, its having 2 or more players able to strip the ball from a single attacker in a tackle that would serve absolutely no purpose.

I`ll come clean. I didn`t read your post carefully enough. If you`re simply asserting support for the current ball-stealing rule, I`m in total agreement.

I thought it was another complaint about the ball-carrier being held off the ground, which is what we normally get when PTB speed is debated.

[barnyia]

In the Catalans v Toulouse friendly there was a klaxon and there shouldn't have been and the Catalans got caught with the ball on the last tackle. The ref did a signal and the klaxon sounded but it wasn't a six again signal. 

[Rupert Prince]

8 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

No we really shouldn't 

Oh yes we should...

[Tommygilf]

15 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Oh yes we should...

There's already a sport that does that if that is what you are looking for

[Rupert Prince]

7 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't want to see 3 players trying to rip the ball off of 1 attacker no more than I want to see "competitive" rucks.

Ah, I see you may not appreciate the word 'competitive' .  I must apologise ... I was struggling to grasp a better word on the spur of the moment.  I'm slow and old.

 But I think it is up to the attacker to hang on to the ball.  The contact/ the ruck is too fast, too easy. There used to be a skill in defending the ruck and playing it back... And there used to be a skill in hooking it back by the defender.   And if the attacker was good enough he could have played it forward to himself if he had forced himself to be unopposed after the tackle.

[unapologetic pedant]

34 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Ah, I see you may not appreciate the word 'competitive' .  I must apologise ... I was struggling to grasp a better word on the spur of the moment.  I'm slow and old.

 But I think it is up to the attacker to hang on to the ball.  The contact/ the ruck is too fast, too easy. There used to be a skill in defending the ruck and playing it back... And there used to be a skill in hooking it back by the defender.   And if the attacker was good enough he could have played it forward to himself if he had forced himself to be unopposed after the tackle.

I reiterate my earlier point that we should specify what we mean by "competitive". My view is that there should be strong competition for how quickly the ball can be played, but only before the tackle is complete.

The rulebook is clear that when the ball or ball-carrying arm reach the ground, tacklers must instantly release. There`s a modicum of leeway for momentum in the tackle on the ground, but extra working and slow peels are illegal. As is any interference in the next stage once the tackled player has raised his upper body or regained his feet.

I would not want to return to any contest for possession at the ruck. You`re right there was value in the tackled player fending the marker and protecting the ball, but there was also a lot of mess.

The equivalent of earning the right to play the ball to yourself in today`s ruck is finding your front and playing the ball quickly, sometimes without markers. The effects of the six-again rule are increasing the occasions the tackled player gets that reward.

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, Rupert Prince said:

Ah, I see you may not appreciate the word 'competitive' .  I must apologise ... I was struggling to grasp a better word on the spur of the moment.  I'm slow and old.

 But I think it is up to the attacker to hang on to the ball.  The contact/ the ruck is too fast, too easy. There used to be a skill in defending the ruck and playing it back... And there used to be a skill in hooking it back by the defender.   And if the attacker was good enough he could have played it forward to himself if he had forced himself to be unopposed after the tackle.

I still don't think that would be particularly enjoyable to watch, RU sevens essentially has similar principles applied with jackling but from a visual perspective I just don't see how they would return to it