So what do players want

[dkw]

On one hand we've got players wanting contact allowed, leniency on head contact, less red/yellow cards,  etc. 

On the other hand, on the evidence of the last 2 weeks we've got players throwing their hands in the air at any contact, play acting head contact, begging refs to make decisions, conning refs to get players binned. 

Refs have a ridiculously difficult time with the new rules as it is, and players are choosing to make it more difficult, while also demanding changes.

Franky I'm sick of them, they want their cake, want to it gift wrapped with little bows and want to eat it.

They can't have this both ways, they can't make demands of the RFL and referees whilst also cheating them at every opportunity, and this also goes for coaches. 

The hypocrisy is embarrassing, the last 2 matches I've watched (Salford v kr and Leeds v catalans) had this all in spades, so much play acting, pressuring refs etc. I now hope the RFL dig in and tell them to shove their demands. 

[RigbyLuger]

16 minutes ago, dkw said:

They can't have this both ways, they can't make demands of the RFL and referees whilst also cheating them at every opportunity, and this also goes for coaches. 

The hypocrisy is embarrassing, the last 2 matches I've watched (Salford v kr and Leeds v catalans) had this all in spades, so much play acting, pressuring refs etc. I now hope the RFL dig in and tell them to shove their demands. 

Whatever suits them the most. It would be great to see Walmsley, Brierley, Williams and all the others quick to moan about the RFL to call out their peers, even without naming names, for their actions in trying to con refs.

[Hopie]

31 minutes ago, dkw said:

On one hand we've got players wanting contact allowed, leniency on head contact, less red/yellow cards,  etc. 

On the other hand, on the evidence of the last 2 weeks we've got players throwing their hands in the air at any contact, play acting head contact, begging refs to make decisions, conning refs to get players binned. 

Refs have a ridiculously difficult time with the new rules as it is, and players are choosing to make it more difficult, while also demanding changes.

Franky I'm sick of them, they want their cake, want to it gift wrapped with little bows and want to eat it.

They can't have this both ways, they can't make demands of the RFL and referees whilst also cheating them at every opportunity, and this also goes for coaches. 

The hypocrisy is embarrassing, the last 2 matches I've watched (Salford v kr and Leeds v catalans) had this all in spades, so much play acting, pressuring refs etc. I now hope the RFL dig in and tell them to shove their demands. 

I'm assuming, as pros, they want to get paid.

If they don't play due to suspension they don't get paid, and they also get fined which means they get lose pay they already earned.

They also get paid more to win, so they will bend the rules as much as they can, and appeal for everything that gives them an advantage. 

It is not difficult to work out why they behave the way they do, and that is why I don't think it is a having it "both ways" approach.

You don't have to condone it to work out why it is happening though. I'm not a fan of the new rules, particularly those coming in next year, and have always hated players play acting and appealing, but the latter has been going on for a long time, and it hasn't been clamped down on enough. The respect campaign should lead to harsher penalties but I suspect the concentration on head injuries and insurance (an important consideration) will mean it falls to the wayside.

 

[yipyee]

14 minutes ago, Hopie said:

I'm assuming, as pros, they want to get paid.

If they don't play due to suspension they don't get paid, and they also get fined which means they get lose pay they already earned.

They also get paid more to win, so they will bend the rules as much as they can, and appeal for everything that gives them an advantage. 

It is not difficult to work out why they behave the way they do, and that is why I don't think it is a having it "both ways" approach.

You don't have to condone it to work out why it is happening though. I'm not a fan of the new rules, particularly those coming in next year, and have always hated players play acting and appealing, but the latter has been going on for a long time, and it hasn't been clamped down on enough. The respect campaign should lead to harsher penalties but I suspect the concentration on head injuries and insurance (an important consideration) will mean it falls to the wayside.

 

Do the players pay the fines or do clubs pay them for them ?

Either way would probably come out of their top line before tax. 

Always found the fine an odd one if there is a restriction on playing as its being punished twice for the same offence. 

[Click]

2 hours ago, Hopie said:

I'm assuming, as pros, they want to get paid.

If they don't play due to suspension they don't get paid, and they also get fined which means they get lose pay they already earned.

They also get paid more to win, so they will bend the rules as much as they can, and appeal for everything that gives them an advantage. 

It is not difficult to work out why they behave the way they do, and that is why I don't think it is a having it "both ways" approach.

You don't have to condone it to work out why it is happening though. I'm not a fan of the new rules, particularly those coming in next year, and have always hated players play acting and appealing, but the latter has been going on for a long time, and it hasn't been clamped down on enough. The respect campaign should lead to harsher penalties but I suspect the concentration on head injuries and insurance (an important consideration) will mean it falls to the wayside.

 

Do clubs  not pay players because they're suspended? That doesn't sound like it would be something happening in Super League when they are professionals.

[Griff]

Players get paid when they're suspended.

They pay their own fines.

The fines aren't tax deductible.

[Harry Stottle]

9 hours ago, Hopie said:

I'm assuming, as pros, they want to get paid.

If they don't play due to suspension they don't get paid, and they also get fined which means they get lose pay they already earned.

They also get paid more to win, so they will bend the rules as much as they can, and appeal for everything that gives them an advantage. 

It is not difficult to work out why they behave the way they do, and that is why I don't think it is a having it "both ways" approach.

You don't have to condone it to work out why it is happening though. I'm not a fan of the new rules, particularly those coming in next year, and have always hated players play acting and appealing, but the latter has been going on for a long time, and it hasn't been clamped down on enough. The respect campaign should lead to harsher penalties but I suspect the concentration on head injuries and insurance (an important consideration) will mean it falls to the wayside.

 

The players are on time established contracts which means they get paid weekly, they are not on a pay as you play basis.

Can you imagine any full time pro signing up to that when for nearly all it is their only source of income.

[Lowdesert]

11 hours ago, dkw said:

On one hand we've got players wanting contact allowed, leniency on head contact, less red/yellow cards,  etc. 

On the other hand, on the evidence of the last 2 weeks we've got players throwing their hands in the air at any contact, play acting head contact, begging refs to make decisions, conning refs to get players binned. 

Refs have a ridiculously difficult time with the new rules as it is, and players are choosing to make it more difficult, while also demanding changes.

Franky I'm sick of them, they want their cake, want to it gift wrapped with little bows and want to eat it.

They can't have this both ways, they can't make demands of the RFL and referees whilst also cheating them at every opportunity, and this also goes for coaches. 

The hypocrisy is embarrassing, the last 2 matches I've watched (Salford v kr and Leeds v catalans) had this all in spades, so much play acting, pressuring refs etc. I now hope the RFL dig in and tell them to shove their demands. 

Pretty sure the hands/arm waiving are coached.

One team I’ve watched this year immediately adopted this from the kick off.  Just ordinary tackles trigger the arm waiving.

 

[dkw]

Just now, Lowdesert said:

Pretty sure the hands/arm waiving are coached.

One team I’ve watched this year immediately adopted this from the kick off.  Just ordinary tackles trigger the arm waiving.

 

It's all about influencing the ref, putting doubt in his mind. Barcelona football admitted they used to make the most of every foul, make it look worse than it was so refs would think they were being booted round the pitch so they would get players booked early.

Our refs should penalise them, tell them to shut up and just get on with the game.

[Chris22]

Where it is easy to criticise, we should praise where players they do the opposite.

Take Ricky Leutele for example. Hurrell and Leutele clashed heads on Friday (Hurrell being the defender). I don't think there was any malice at all on Hurrell's part but he didn't bend his back either. It happened very quickly and was hard to spot until a replay. If Leutele stayed down, it would have been reviewed and Hurrell may have been sin binned or sent off. He got up and the game continued.

Although the job of players is to win. When a rule gets puts in place, they will try and get around it. Always have, always will.

[LeeF]

13 hours ago, dkw said:

On one hand we've got players wanting contact allowed, leniency on head contact, less red/yellow cards,  etc. 

On the other hand, on the evidence of the last 2 weeks we've got players throwing their hands in the air at any contact, play acting head contact, begging refs to make decisions, conning refs to get players binned. 

Refs have a ridiculously difficult time with the new rules as it is, and players are choosing to make it more difficult, while also demanding changes.

Franky I'm sick of them, they want their cake, want to it gift wrapped with little bows and want to eat it.

They can't have this both ways, they can't make demands of the RFL and referees whilst also cheating them at every opportunity, and this also goes for coaches. 

The hypocrisy is embarrassing, the last 2 matches I've watched (Salford v kr and Leeds v catalans) had this all in spades, so much play acting, pressuring refs etc. I now hope the RFL dig in and tell them to shove their demands. 

In addition to three players and coaches complaining about the new laws/ interpretations and the subsequent bans, which the majority of posters on here understand the reasons for introducing and accept them being introduced, you now have the “tame” reporters supporting the whinging and trying to get the RFL to drop the changes. This is exactly what was mentioned as would happen on this forum when the changes were first announced. 

I agree that the RFL should dig in and it is has been good to see the likes of Robert Hicks being made available for interviews etc to explain the reasons for the changes etc. That is a welcome change from the normal RFL behaviour which under previous regimes used to just go silent and then give in.

All the arm waiving and the deliberate inflaming of “incidents” by running in needs to stop with that either done by the players and coaches ceasing to behave like that or a clampdown for a week or so with the dugout benches or chairs being warmed up for 10 minutes on a regular basis. 

[gingerjon]

2 hours ago, dkw said:

Barcelona football admitted they used to make the most of every foul

It goes back further than that and sometimes in slightly different ways. There was a documentary on Wimbledon's FA Cup win which said that the team would be briefed about the ref's personal situation - wife, kids etc, and than they would practice asking natural sounding questions to the ref when warming up and in the tunnel. Just so the ref would be their mate. They still got cautions and sendings off but far fewer - because they'd convinced the ref they were decent blokes.

[Dave T]

I do think this is being somewhat overstated. Players appeal for decisions, they always have. I find it relatively easy to ignore it tbh and it just doesn't bother me. 

[Phil]

2 hours ago, LeeF said:

 

All the arm waiving and the deliberate inflaming of “incidents” by running in needs to stop with that either done by the players and coaches ceasing to behave like that or a clampdown for a week or so with the dugout benches or chairs being warmed up for 10 minutes on a regular basis. 

Running in used to be a sending off, certainly was when I was reffing, there didn’t have to be any contact, that was “running in and striking”

[Hopie]

6 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

The players are on time established contracts which means they get paid weekly, they are not on a pay as you play basis.

Can you imagine any full time pro signing up to that when for nearly all it is their only source of income.

I think I could have been clearer, but I would be very surprised if players contracts didn't include bonuses for playing/appearances, so if they don't play they get paid less. What club would offer a contract that had no incentive to play the game?

[Impartial Observer]

8 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

The players are on time established contracts which means they get paid weekly, they are not on a pay as you play basis.

Can you imagine any full time pro signing up to that when for nearly all it is their only source of income.

Imagine how much Liam Watts would get paid if it was pay as you play. 

[phiggins]

21 hours ago, Chris22 said:

It happened very quickly and was hard to spot until a replay. If Leutele stayed down, it would have been reviewed and Hurrell may have been sin binned or sent off. He got up and the game continued.

This is something that the officials / governing body need to address though. Instances like Leutele not staying down to get the incident reviewed will become rarer and rarer as time goes on. Almost like when football referees stopped giving free kicks when a player was fouled and not grounded, so players started throwing themselves to the ground.

Video refs either need to be allowed to review incidents that should lead to cards as the game goes on, or not review anything unless called on by the on field ref for a try, and let the MRP deal with such incidents.

[Harry Stottle]

18 hours ago, Hopie said:

I think I could have been clearer, but I would be very surprised if players contracts didn't include bonuses for playing/appearances, so if they don't play they get paid less. What club would offer a contract that had no incentive to play the game?

You are quite right, yes they are on bonuses which I am happy to be corrected do not count on the salary cap, how do you think the top clubs keep attracting the best player's they wouldn't if every players was on a flat salary cap base wage.

Edited March 4 by Harry Stottle

[Sports Prophet]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

You are quite right, yes they are on bonuses which I am happy to be corrected do not count on the salary cap, how do you think the top clubs keep attracting the best player's they wouldn't if every players was on a flat salary cap base wage.

Bonuses not included in the salary cap? I bet they are. 

In Aus, this is how some clubs have been caught foul of breaching the cap, because players earn unexpected bonuses which tip them over from time to time.

Edited March 4 by Sports Prophet

[moorside roughyed]

On 03/03/2024 at 10:14, dkw said:

It's all about influencing the ref, putting doubt in his mind. Barcelona football admitted they used to make the most of every foul, make it look worse than it was so refs would think they were being booted round the pitch so they would get players booked early.

Our refs should penalise them, tell them to shut up and just get on with the game.

Agree with your second paragraph 100%. I've always thought that.The stuff that happens in soccer with players surrounding the ref etc is disgusting,no respect.

[Trojan Horse]

It simply doesn’t matter what they want. 
 

They and the sport will do what the insurance company tells them to do in order to obtain the insurance. 
 

It is that simple. 
 

If they want to be heard then they need to consult and raise a document detailing concerns and suggestions to mitigate the risk to players in place of what’s proposed and present that to the RFL for consideration and response of the insurers. 
 

This is the correct way to deal with it and not all the guff around it. All that’s required is someone to take responsibility and lead the process from a player and RFL perspective and streamline it appropriately. 

[RigbyLuger]

21 minutes ago, Trojan Horse said:

It simply doesn’t matter what they want. 
 

They and the sport will do what the insurance company tells them to do in order to obtain the insurance. 
 

It is that simple. 
 

If they want to be heard then they need to consult and raise a document detailing concerns and suggestions to mitigate the risk to players in place of what’s proposed and present that to the RFL for consideration and response of the insurers. 
 

This is the correct way to deal with it and not all the guff around it. All that’s required is someone to take responsibility and lead the process from a player and RFL perspective and streamline it appropriately. 

A bit like Adam Fogety moaning about the Harry Sunderland renaming, without being in possession of the full facts (albeit, this is slightly more important!)

[Chrispmartha]

2 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Bonuses not included in the salary cap? I bet they are. 

In Aus, this is how some clubs have been caught foul of breaching the cap, because players earn unexpected bonuses which tip them over from time to time.

I think normal bonuses are included in the cap.

International bonuses and also money paid through winning something (i.e CC or SL title) aren't included

[dkw]

4 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

I think normal bonuses are included in the cap.

International bonuses and also money paid through winning something (i.e CC or SL title) aren't included

Are you sure about that? I'm sure I remember clubs getting into trouble due to competition bonuses.

[Red Willow]

The players are asking for consultation on how the rules will apply, they are experts after all. The recent change after the head class is an example of where the players might have helped