MRP Minutes

[Sports Prophet]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I think if you stand tall and make no attempt to bend your back/knees, then you have no mitigation. I genuinely believe that has to be the starting point tbh. 

From my point of view, his arm height at the point he committed was shoulder height or below and that arm never went higher. It was a sudden change in height by the ball carrier which did not allow the McIlorum enough time to change his tackle height.

Regardless, the decision is made. I disagree with the severity he has been sanctioned but I am not too precious about it when we will see a lot more of this over the coming weeks before things calm down a bit.

Edited February 20 by Sports Prophet

[muckymunksy]

2 hours ago, FearTheVee said:

What reactionary nonsense.

You must enjoy seeing 13-12 or 13-11 

[Chrispmartha]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

I won't after this season I will be long gone Budgie over to the amatuer game until that gets spoiled.

I am happy in the knowledge that for over 60 years I have watched the best this sport has had to offer at professional level, it used to be that the refs got all the accolades when "they weren't noticed" during the game, the authorities have now put them at the centre of attention and then they sit back like "big brother" analysing and scouring every second of every game trying to find something that 3 onfield, two offield and those in attendance on the terraces and in the stands have not noticed, I will never get used to it nor will I want to try.

Every year we get these type of posts (not singling you out)

It will settle down, players and refs will get used to the new rules, and we'll go through it all again next year.

[phiggins]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I think if you stand tall and make no attempt to bend your back/knees, then you have no mitigation. I genuinely believe that has to be the starting point tbh. 

Agree to an extent, that is why Amone got 2 games (though I think that is harsh, not even convinced there was head contact given the speed of collision and barely any reaction), but it does feel like there needs to be more consideration for who's movement has contributed most to the head contact when dishing out punishment. The danger is, we lose the balance between attack and defence, and when the armpit rule comes in next year, there will be an increased risk of defenders clashing heads with each other. 

[FearTheVee]

12 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

My feelings exactly, again like I have done for many many years I have paid and got my season ticket, I am wishing I hadn't now, and this is only the pre curser for next season's enforcements I doubt I will be buying another season ticket.

Sounds like Leigh lost their opener . . . .

[Chrispmartha]

13 minutes ago, FearTheVee said:

Sounds like Leigh lost their opener . . . .

I thought Id seen Harry wasn't getting a season ticket this year after the IMG grading system came out ?

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

I do think there are several general factors that should be considered in mitigation and this is one of them. Does the tackler bend his back/legs and does the tackler try to wrap his arms are the two obvious ones. Then things like does the attacker dip but the tackler has to be making a proper, legal attempt first really - that is the key.

I think that's my view - the reason they ahve to be encouraged to bend their back/leg is because of the risk that a player may end up going lower as they are tackled by somebody else. That isn't some kind of unknown phenomenon. If a 6ft 3inch player stands tall and hits somebody in the head with his shoulder, then there is no mitigation imo. That absolutely has to be the starter.

[bamfordsbeans]

Whilst the new regulations are probably the right solution in the long term,I hope the players learn quickly.

The downside is that you are more likely to see 13 v 12 or 12 x 12 games as last weekend.

With the number of suspensions clubs are going to need large squads.

[Dunbar]

I think we do have to have a sensible conversation on the impact of the new laws / interpretations - both this year and especially next year - on the game day experience.

I don’t think dismissing the concerns of fans outright is the way forward.

Firstly, it is paramount that foul play is punished and the sport should be doing everything it can to address head contact and mitigate the effects that it has on player's health.  This mitigation goes far beyond the punishment of in-play contact with the head but it is a highly visible part and so we should address it.

But at the same time, we need to assess the impact of this focus on the sport itself, its competitiveness and its appeal to the supporters.

There are a number of key issues that I think we can address and decide the best course of action:

Firstly, as I have already mentioned, I think there is a very valid argument around letting a team replace a carded player – maybe for a 10 minutes sin bin but certainly for a red card – i.e. the carded player is excluded from the rest of the game but the team can return to 13 after 10 minutes.  So all cards are 10 minute punishments for the team but a red carded player cannot return.

Secondly, the role of the video ref in identifying foul play in game.  I have sympathy for Harry’s point here – having the video ref pour over every tackle to find foul play impacts the spectacle.  Particularly seeing as we have the citing process post match to identify any foul play that was missed on the pitch.  Yes, there is an argument that foul play going unpunished is unfair but there is also an argument to say that we shouldn’t impact the spectacle too much and keep stopping the game to find things to punish.  Trust the on-field officials to identify and penalise the vast majority of foul play.

If identifying and punishing players for head contact is part of our mitigation around player welfare then citing and punishing a player post game will still re-enforce behaviour.

We need to find the balance between enforcing the laws and protecting players and the impact on the sporting contest.  We may have it right and that is an ok conclusion but there is no harm having the conversation.  As a sport, I would prefer us to address this in 2024 and not 2025 when I think everything we hear today will be multiplied 10 fold.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Sports Prophet said:

From my point of view, his arm height at the point he committed was shoulder height or below and that arm never went higher. It was a sudden change in height by the ball carrier which did not allow the McIlorum enough time to change his tackle height.

Regardless, the decision is made. I disagree with the severity he has been sanctioned but I am not too precious about it when we will see a lot more of this over the coming weeks before things calm down a bit.

I've just watched it again in slow mo, and you see that the movement just prior to contact was MM rising, he is springing himself up into the player. I don't see any mitigation tbh.

Agree on things settling, whether that is lowering or it becoming the new normal.

[RigbyLuger]

7 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Trust the on-field officials to identify and penalise the vast majority of foul play.

I wonder if Tom Grant had over ruled the Video Ref on a red card for a Cas player and given a yellow instead, whether that we'd still be hearing about it days later. 

[Bull Mania]

2 hours ago, FearTheVee said:

The games weren’t the greatest but I must have missed the period in time when torrential downpours in the first game of the season was a recipe for brilliant rugby.

The biggest culprits for ruining a game that I watched were the players of Hull FC not the ref or the rules.

Certainly not bagging the refs, I thought they explained the rules well. 

But we have to get a balance between making the game safe and still having entertainment (that doesn't mean bring back the biff, shoulder charge etc) 

Fans have a lot of options how to spend their money nowadays. While we all snigger at the "games dying" line, RL has been declining steadily over a number of years. Banning 11 players every game will only enhance that decline IMO

[Click]

6 minutes ago, Bull Mania said:

Certainly not bagging the refs, I thought they explained the rules well. 

But we have to get a balance between making the game safe and still having entertainment (that doesn't mean bring back the biff, shoulder charge etc) 

Fans have a lot of options how to spend their money nowadays. While we all snigger at the "games dying" line, RL has been declining steadily over a number of years. Banning 11 players every game will only enhance that decline IMO

You best start talking to the players and telling them to stop hitting each other in the head then.

[Harry Stottle]

52 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I thought Id seen Harry wasn't getting a season ticket this year after the IMG grading system came out ?

Read back Chris, I didn't  say as such but it was a consideration.

[Bull Mania]

Just now, Click said:

You best start talking to the players and telling them to stop hitting each other in the head then.

Just a lazy throwaway line. No problem for bans Peles action for example. But players aren't going out trying to snot each other's heads off. 

But the Leigh player for example has not gone to hit anyone in the head and it's ricoulous he's been banned. 

[Click]

2 minutes ago, Bull Mania said:

Just a lazy throwaway line. No problem for bans Peles action for example. But players aren't going out trying to snot each other's heads off. 

But the Leigh player for example has not gone to hit anyone in the head and it's ricoulous he's been banned. 

Just a lazy throwaway point of thinking the first round is going to reflect the quality of the rest of the season, as well as disciplinaries going forward. 

It's the first week of the season, you often get more incidents happening. 

I have no idea what the Leigh player did, is that the lifting one? I can't say I have watched each individual incident, but from the bans that I have seen, they seem to be justified in the main for the player getting a ban.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

It will settle down, players and refs will get used to the new rules, and we'll go through it all again next year

Will it? Last year the panel were to pedantic and I have no reason to believe it will improve any as this season goes on, as for next season as I say I will not be purchasing a ST l will give it a go but as Dunny says he expects controversy to increase 10 fold with the next new rules, will that be an enjoyable experience, not for me it won’t.

[Chrispmartha]

18 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Read back Chris, I didn't  say as such but it was a consideration.

I've absolutely zero intention of reading back, I just remember you saying you weren't going to buy a season ticket in the spreadsheet era. Glad that you decided to purchase one.

[Click]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Will it? Last year the panel were to pedantic and I have no reason to believe it will improve any as this season goes on, as for next season as I say I will not be purchasing a ST l will give it a go but as Dunny says he expects controversy to increase 10 fold with the next new rules, will that be an enjoyable experience, not for me it won’t.

Not sure how you can decide that you won't be buying a ST NEXT YEAR for rules that haven't been implemented yet. 

[Lowdesert]

3 hours ago, FearTheVee said:

The games weren’t the greatest but I must have missed the period in time when torrential downpours in the first game of the season was a recipe for brilliant rugby.

The biggest culprits for ruining a game that I watched were the players of Hull FC not the ref or the rules.

Pele got sent off and a ban is coming. Fair enough.  

Esse Ese wasn’t much at all and Yellow was the right decision imo.  Also the Ref said to EE that it wasn’t forceful.  It appears now that the MRP said it was forceful, contra to the Ref. These decisions are now questionable and, it appears, the MRP hold sway even though the Refs are in the best place to make that call. 
 

Again imo, they are all trying to cover themselves due to future claims. Understandable that players are considering striking.
 

 

 

 

[GeordieSaint]

An interesting element to this debate is the players themselves. Walmsley’s comments about a players union and having a say in decisions that impact the game is an interesting debate. Seen others today as well (not from the retired player cohort). 

[Dave T]

I do wonder whether there is a case for wholesale changes in our 'punishment' structure. 

Maybe move more like football - red card, say 2 match ban, yellows accumulate. We move on and avoid the drama.

Or, maybe we accept that this is all part of the sporting soap opera.

[RigbyLuger]

21 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I do wonder whether there is a case for wholesale changes in our 'punishment' structure. 

Maybe move more like football - red card, say 2 match ban, yellows accumulate. We move on and avoid the drama.

Or, maybe we accept that this is all part of the sporting soap opera.

Is the difference in physicality, and playing much fewer games, the problem in copying football's system?

 

As we saw last year, coaches are unhappy when their stars are banned, but are more concerned about moaning about the MRP than the actions of their players.

 

How many times has Liam Watts been banned, for example? Shouldn't some of the "issue" be placed on him, because it doesn't seem to have changed anything. He's have been penalised for what he did on Saturday if it was a year back and more.

[phiggins]

1 hour ago, Click said:

Just a lazy throwaway point of thinking the first round is going to reflect the quality of the rest of the season, as well as disciplinaries going forward. 

It's the first week of the season, you often get more incidents happening. 

I have no idea what the Leigh player did, is that the lifting one? I can't say I have watched each individual incident, but from the bans that I have seen, they seem to be justified in the main for the player getting a ban.

It is believed to be this, I think 

Unless he is referring to the Luetele sin bin, which to me looked like initial contact with the shoulder of a ball carrier that is falling. Which, seems very harsh to me.

[Taffy Tiger]

2 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

I wonder if Tom Grant had over ruled the Video Ref on a red card for a Cas player and given a yellow instead, whether that we'd still be hearing about it days later. 

yes , from you