Batley game Boxing Day.

[Blind side johnny]

20 minutes ago, SUPERSTUD said:

Yeah So I hear. But what was the perceived issue. To the book I believe the rule is something like stand up place the ball on the floor in front of you and play it in a backwards motion with your foot. A player must make a genuine attempt to play the ball with their foot. This is where the subjective decision making of a referee comes into play. It’s going to be a veeeeeery loooooong season if today is anything to go by. Get to the stage where players will basically slow time it by playing the ball in almost slow motion thus killing the game as a fast moving spectacle. New risk averse armpit law to come in also and no I don’t want a player’s head knocking off. Just concerned about situations such as tracking a player from behind and hauling them down with a last gasp shirt grab that just happens to be above the armpit. Personally worried about the future of the game!

I believe, but may be wrong, that now the foot must actually touch the ball rather than Attempt" to. I also recall that the ball is not now in play until it is touched with the foot as distinct from when it was placed on the floor. It might mean the players won't be in such a hurry to play the ball quickly.

Last season in C1 we did get away with just rolling the ball back and waving a boot in its general direction.

I can't see the referees in the Championship being as pedantic but might well be wrong. The "armpit law" as you call it doesn't come in until 2025 in the professional leagues, I believe.

[Therein73]

On the play the ball issue, let's hope we get it sorted quickly.... Rather today than in a Championship fixture .... Thought the game was a good offering for pre-season fodder and some of our new guys showed up well .... A decent crowd and favourable weather all adding up to a good 'do' all round .... Roll on the season proper

[distantdog]

1 hour ago, Blind side johnny said:

Without a doubt the referee was overly pedantic and spoiled what could have been a very good game. On the other hand our players didn't seem to cotton on to what the issue was, leading to a 25-9 penalty count and a consequent possession deficit throughout.

Against that background I thought that we defended very well, playing most of the game without the ball. There were some very promising individual performances but the team played really well for each other. Compared with many Boxing Day games it was very enjoyable.
 

Batley look as if they are going to be heavily dependent upon loan players from Castleford next season. Their fans would have been quite relieved with the draw.

I think we looked like what we are, a team in transition and one relying on new, young signings. It was clear that we were struggling in the first half, but became a little more fluent in the second half and think we were the better team at the end. Interesting comments re our pack, as l think our best players were Gledhill, Ward and Cooper. 

While the ref was undoubtedly pedantic, how many times do your team need telling, to learn? As well as the handovers for incorrect play the balls (do they count as penalties?) I saw the ref explaining the rule (law?) three times to players from your team. I wonder if your club have had a refs visit to explain the new rules. 

Anyway, it was good to see some rugby again. Welcome back.

 

[muddyfunster]

I think Chapmans after match interview was interesting. "We need direction from the RFL on the PTB rule.

What should be concerning for all (us the governing body and our opponents today) is the one sided (25 to 9 penalty court) We need to be smarter, those controlling the officials need to assess how the rule is enforced (there shouldn't be so much difference between 2 sides without question) and the dogs need to look as to why they couldn't capitalise on such a favorable penalty count (not that the latter bothers me much).

Early signs are pleasing tho. Or maybe its just relief of being out in the fresh air without it peeing down, and watching some live sport!

Edited December 26, 2023 by muddyfunster

[STEVE P]

2 hours ago, SUPERSTUD said:

Yeah So I hear. But what was the perceived issue. To the book I believe the rule is something like stand up place the ball on the floor in front of you and play it in a backwards motion with your foot. A player must make a genuine attempt to play the ball with their foot. This is where the subjective decision making of a referee comes into play. It’s going to be a veeeeeery loooooong season if today is anything to go by. Get to the stage where players will basically slow time it by playing the ball in almost slow motion thus killing the game as a fast moving spectacle. New risk averse armpit law to come in also and no I don’t want a player’s head knocking off. Just concerned about situations such as tracking a player from behind and hauling them down with a last gasp shirt grab that just happens to be above the armpit. Personally worried about the future of the game!

Don't worry. The first weekend of televised super  duper which consists of games blighted by the stopping and starting we saw today and the telly people will have the issue swept back under the carpet super duper quickly.

[NickD]

5 hours ago, coolie said:

We need to get smart

Play the ball needs serious attention 

Game management must be better

Wrong choices for me today

12-0 up with about 13 minutes to go

Very kickable penalty within the 20

Kick that 14-0 up and the game is over

Instead we spill the ball in the first couple of tackles, penalty penalty penalty and Batley are back in the game. 

Regardless of it been a friendly we must be smarter. 

Pointless going for 2 points in a friendly.    Very happy to see the lads tap and go.   All about practice at this stage of the season. 

[RugbyPowelly]

On various social media platforms today I’ve seen some negative stuff regarding the performance today. I think we need to be careful with expectation and not get too frustrated.

Those who saw the team last season knew it was talented but naive - and it needed to really develop a lot to have a strong impact in the Championship. I think what we’ve seen today is what is to be expected in the upcoming season.

We’ve not spent a silly fortune like some have and have just bolstered a young team with some other decent prospects. We therefore need to focus on surviving and expect some iffy moments and not get overly emotional when it’s not happening.

I questioned our forwards ability last season, especially in defence, and it was apparent to me again today. But in general there’s loads of positives and we need to keep our supporter focus on these.

[Ovenden Grunt]

18 hours ago, STEVE P said:

Anybody else see the link between the kick off time and the score. 

Should have kicked off 2 minutes earlier, then we'd have pinched it.

I was happy with the performance. Despite the number of hand overs and free kicks we conceded Dewsbury were by far the better side. The Batley pack looked the most ineffective I can remember seeing in a long time. 

Why was it a 12.12 kick off?

[STEVE P]

26 minutes ago, Ovenden Grunt said:

Why was it a 12.12 kick off?

Shrug of the shoulders.

(Couldn't find an emoji)

[Blind side johnny]

2 hours ago, Ovenden Grunt said:

Why was it a 12.12 kick off?

Surely you know?

Isn't it obvious?

[RogerT]

No.

[Ovenden Grunt]

2 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

Surely you know?

Isn't it obvious?

No.

[Sir Jekyll Stocking]

Reel them in, BSJ...

[Wakefield Ram]

What was the attendance?

[Bill H]

2 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

Surely you know?

Isn't it obvious?

What?  Foresight?

[SUPERSTUD]

21 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

I believe, but may be wrong, that now the foot must actually touch the ball rather than Attempt" to. I also recall that the ball is not now in play until it is touched with the foot as distinct from when it was placed on the floor. It might mean the players won't be in such a hurry to play the ball quickly.

Last season in C1 we did get away with just rolling the ball back and waving a boot in its general direction.

I can't see the referees in the Championship being as pedantic but might well be wrong. The "armpit law" as you call it doesn't come in until 2025 in the professional leagues, I believe.

I was not present at the game yesterday so I am not in a position to give an informed view. Family members were present and within I believe it was about nine minutes I received a phone call saying how lucky I was not to be there as it was going to be a very long day. Personally I have no problem with the play the ball being cleaned up. However if the penalty count is true as reported 25-9 against the rams then IMHO something is potentially wrong. If the opposition in this case Batley were that clean cut then forget about contacting the RFL for future guidance. Invite the Batley coaches and players to training in order to provide a live demonstration as they have obviously mastered the new rules. Not a dig at Batley by the way they just happened to be the opposition on this occasion.

[coolie]

5 hours ago, Ovenden Grunt said:

Why was it a 12.12 kick off?

We only had 2 numbers for the sign

1's & 2's

 

 

That's why the game ended 12-12

Or we wouldn't have been able to put the score up

 

 

 

Edited December 27, 2023 by coolie

[Blind side johnny]

13 minutes ago, SUPERSTUD said:

I was not present at the game yesterday so I am not in a position to give an informed view. Family members were present and within I believe it was about nine minutes I received a phone call saying how lucky I was not to be there as it was going to be a very long day. Personally I have no problem with the play the ball being cleaned up. However if the penalty count is true as reported 25-9 against the rams then IMHO something is potentially wrong. If the opposition in this case Batley were that clean cut then forget about contacting the RFL for future guidance. Invite the Batley coaches and players to training in order to provide a live demonstration as they have obviously mastered the new rules. Not a dig at Batley by the way they just happened to be the opposition on this occasion.

I read elsewhere that the Bradford v Halifax game had a penalty count of 8-5, 13 in total. I don't know who their referee was but it can't have simply been the players, a degree of pedantry was apparent throughout, I'm afraid. These changes are in the process of being introduced and this was a friendly. I feel that a more sensitive, in-tune official, might have addressed things differently.

Of course, thanks to his SL experience, he only saw one forward pass in the whole match.

[NickD]

1 hour ago, Blind side johnny said:

I read elsewhere that the Bradford v Halifax game had a penalty count of 8-5, 13 in total. I don't know who their referee was but it can't have simply been the players, a degree of pedantry was apparent throughout, I'm afraid. These changes are in the process of being introduced and this was a friendly. I feel that a more sensitive, in-tune official, might have addressed things differently.

Of course, thanks to his SL experience, he only saw one forward pass in the whole match.

Good spot BSJ.   I rarely see Super Dooper rugby but when I do am staggered by the number of “flat” passes

[Sir Jekyll Stocking]

23 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

I believe, but may be wrong, that now the foot must actually touch the ball rather than Attempt" to. I also recall that the ball is not now in play until it is touched with the foot as distinct from when it was placed on the floor. It might mean the players won't be in such a hurry to play the ball quickly.

Last season in C1 we did get away with just rolling the ball back and waving a boot in its general direction.

I can't see the referees in the Championship being as pedantic but might well be wrong. The "armpit law" as you call it doesn't come in until 2025 in the professional leagues, I believe.

Pots and kettles spring to mind, BSJ.

But what do you expect a referee to do, when he sees an infringement? ignore it, or penalise it?

And if the infringement is repeated?

And should he turn a blind eye after the twentieth repetition, or maintain consistency?

Who'd be a ref, eh?

Edited December 27, 2023 by Sir Jekyll Stocking

[Therein73]

2 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

What was the attendance?

1212.........

[coolie]

I feel our game on boxing day was simply used as a "Guinea Pig" 

For the new rule changes and that's why we got Kendall to simply give him game time under the new rules

Apparently at the Rhinos Vs Wakefield game had very little penalties for incorrect play the ball. 

Mr Kendall performance will have been watched by the RFL and he will be told to calm the penalties down for super league, if he had performed like that in the first week of super league, the rule would be binned off by the second week

Not good for the game as a spectacle 

This week's 3 training sessions should consist simply of re education on how to play the ball like the new rule says

[coolie]

20 hours ago, NickD said:

Pointless going for 2 points in a friendly.    Very happy to see the lads tap and go.   All about practice at this stage of the season. 

So it's pointless winning a game because it's a friendly

That's really stupid comment mate

Game management is game management, you learn how to close a game down for a victory

Regardless if it's a friendly or not game management is really important, kick a penalty from in the 20 to increase the score to "3 scores" is important when only 13 minutes to go, a friendly is the perfect opportunity to try this philosophy out. 

I'm just baffled by your comment

Edited December 27, 2023 by coolie

[coolie]

1 hour ago, Therein73 said:

1212.........

2112

They'll be a RUSH on now

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Only people with a vast knowledge of music will get that one

[Blind side johnny]

1 hour ago, Sir Jekyll Stocking said:

Pots and kettles spring to mind, BSJ.

But what do you expect a referee to do, when he sees an infringement? ignore it, or penalise it?

And if the infringement is repeated?

And should he turn a blind eye after the twentieth repetition, or maintain consistency?

Who'd be a ref, eh?

A bit of devil's advocate there SJS. Refereeing involves nuance SJS as I'm sure that you know. Any referee will tell you that they could blow for an infringement every single minute but they don't (or didn't) preferring to have a quiet word on the run after the first infringement and promising to blow if it is repeated. Blowing for every single thing is my definition of pedantry.