Final Whistle: The Rugby League rules I’d like to see changed

[Rugby League World]

RUGBY LEAGUE today is not the same game as it was when I was growing up. It looks and feels different. The changes we have...

View the full article

[StandOffHalf]

The 6 again, the NRL one-on-one strip, and not being able to PTB to oneself.

[Dunbar]

Unlike the author of the article, I would like us to take a harder line on the voluntary tackle law.

I would like the law to be amended to clarify that deliberately going to ground without being tackled is an offence and enforce that.

I lose count of the number of times across games that a player is bringing the ball away from his own in-goal and this should be a critical tackle, can he escape, can the opposition trap him in goal – and he just throws himself to the ground.  I think it is against the spirit of a game based on tackling and escaping tackles. 

Enforcing this would make the game more entertaining and competitive in my view.

[Wiltshire Warrior Dragon]

I would just like one set of laws and for them to say what they mean and mean what they say, and be fully implemented in every game.

For instance, we have seen a good degree of tidying up of the PTB this year in SL, but this has been achieved by concentrating on the defenders.  When did you last see a tackled player penalised (yes, I mean penalised) for moving forward at the PTB.  When did you last see a tackled player penalised for not allowing time for the tacklers to clear the ruck?

I love our game, but it does seem odd compared to other sports whose laws I know something about in two senses: first, the officials spend a lot of time advising the players what they must not do; second, there is this seemingly random ignoring of some laws.  By contrast, in ice hockey, which I watch quite a bit, I cannot think of a law which is not routinely enforced.

Incidentally, next time you see a tackled player regain is feet only to drop the ball, don't be too quick to scream for a knock on.  As long as he plays it back with his foot, he is doing what the laws permit.  Do you think any ref would let that go?  No, neither do I!

[DavidM]

1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

I would like the law to be amended to clarify that deliberately going to ground without being tackled is an offence and enforce that.

100% . Ours is a physical contact sport , avoiding contact by throwing yourself to the floor should be an immediate penalty . It happens way to much and looks awful . Even more so when the defender gets penalised for to rough treatment on a ball carrier just lying on the ground . 
I also don’t think touching the ball when making a tackle should be six again , just about every other occasion not playing at the ball is ruled as such . 
We need to follow the NRL rules on downtown from kicks and blockers from kicks . 
Six agains irritate me in some instances . I see the positives but I’d say an awful lot  come very early on in the tackle count and they’re deliberate and cynical but it’s just not a punishment . Teams swallow it . Near the line you should be able to kick at goal and more sin bins should be used . 
We should scrap  the VR but we won’t . So it should be pared right back . It shouldn’t judge obstructions or anything that’s still opinion or subjective and be factual like touchdowns only ( goals in football to ) . Players play to the VR to - as in staying down for pens . If you do that you should have to go off for 10 minutes you’re obviously injured .

There’s several other things I’d change to 

[DavidM]

33 minutes ago, Wiltshire Warrior Dragon said:

but this has been achieved by concentrating on the defenders.  When did you last see a tackled player penalised (yes, I mean penalised) for moving forward at the PTB.  When did you last see a tackled player penalised for not allowing time for the tacklers to clear the ruck?

Indeed , often there’s an imbalance in terms of the rules being enforced depending on if you’re in possession or not . I’ve wrote about that before . In the NRL taking out the marker gets a ‘ go back and play the ball ‘ . Why ? Here if you move off the mark a ref says ‘ don’t move off the mark ‘ . Funnily enough when you’re running the clock down you can slow the ptb down as much as you want. Also if you take a penalty or restart from the wrong place or there’s men in front you shouldn’t be able to do it again . And you shouldn’t be able to run yards forward before kicking it . And don’t ignore offsides at kickoffs 

Edited April 23 by DavidM

[phiggins]

9 minutes ago, DavidM said:

100% . Ours is a physical contact sport , avoiding contact by throwing yourself to the floor should be an immediate penalty . It happens way to much and looks awful . Even more so when the defender gets penalised for to rough treatment on a ball carrier just lying on the ground . 
I also don’t think touching the ball when making a tackle should be six again , just about every other occasion not playing at the ball is ruled as such . 
We need to follow the NRL rules on downtown from kicks and blockers from kicks . 
Six agains irritate me in some instances . I see the positives but I’d say an awful lot  come very early on in the tackle count and they’re deliberate and cynical but it’s just not a punishment . Teams swallow it . Near the line you should be able to kick at goal and more sin bins should be used . 
We should scrap  the VR but we won’t . So it should be pared right back . It shouldn’t judge obstructions or anything that’s still opinion or subjective and be factual like touchdowns only ( goals in football to ) . Players play to the VR to - as in staying down for pens . If you do that you should have to go off for 10 minutes you’re obviously injured .

There’s several other things I’d change to 

Trouble with penalising players going to ground is that you will almost guarantee a repeat set with any sort of kick to the corner. In those instances, the defending team gets a bit longer to setup from the surrender tackle and are in a good position to pen a team in.

Agree on the VR, I personally would like to see it scrapped. And I think with all the negative noise about VAR in football, it would be a good time to scrap it. If we do keep VR, I'd bring something in to deter defending teams from trying to influence the referee when they're about to make a decision or on field decision for the video ref. If a player approaches the referee before he's made his decision, or completed the referral, then the play will restart with a 20 metre tap to the opposition, regardless of the outcome of the video check.

I'd also give referees the power to give yellow cards to players if they think they're trying to referee the game on their behalf. When both Jai Field and Bevan French gave the sin bin signal to the ref after a trip on Good Friday, I wouldn't have had any problem with the ref saying, "you want a yellow card, there you go!"

[DavidM]

Often it’s not new rules , it’s enforcing rules in place . We concentrate on and  highlight some so refs watch those as they’re told to but others we pretty much let go by . 

[Phil]

1 hour ago, Wiltshire Warrior Dragon said:

I would just like one set of laws and for them to say what they mean and mean what they say, and be fully implemented in every game.

For instance, we have seen a good degree of tidying up of the PTB this year in SL, but this has been achieved by concentrating on the defenders.  When did you last see a tackled player penalised (yes, I mean penalised) for moving forward at the PTB.  When did you last see a tackled player penalised for not allowing time for the tacklers to clear the ruck?

I love our game, but it does seem odd compared to other sports whose laws I know something about in two senses: first, the officials spend a lot of time advising the players what they must not do; second, there is this seemingly random ignoring of some laws.  By contrast, in ice hockey, which I watch quite a bit, I cannot think of a law which is not routinely enforced.

Incidentally, next time you see a tackled player regain is feet only to drop the ball, don't be too quick to scream for a knock on.  As long as he plays it back with his foot, he is doing what the laws permit.  Do you think any ref would let that go?  No, neither do I!

“The tackled player will regain his feet and PLACE OR DROP the ball in front of him and play it backwards with his foot”

It seems we change “interpretations” but leave the laws as they are, voluntary tackle etc 

[JF1]

When I started watching RL,a trip meant instant dismissal. Now it is 50-50 between a sin binning or just a penalty. I would like to see the former as a minimum.

I'm sure,when the sin bin was introduced,an option of 5 or 10 minutes were available. Or have I imagined that?

 

[sentoffagain2]

     Don't like the six again.And i have never liked the scoring side receiving the ball back after scoring.

[burnleywelsh]

As far as I'm concerned the referee should be the sole arbiter of the game. The Video Ref is there to assist. What really bugs me is when they look for stuff that they haven't been asked to look at. Last night for Giants 2nd try, the Ref asked for on side off side at the kick and grounding. That is it as far as i'm concerned. The Ref is obviously happy with everything else. The VR then goes on to check whether there was a knock on, going over and over again, wasting so much time. It happens all the time, the VR looking for stuff that the Ref hasn't asked for. It's tedious. "Can you give me another angle......." etc,etc.....The NRL are so much quicker in reaching a decision.....

[bobbruce]

On 23/04/2024 at 14:03, StandOffHalf said:

The 6 again, the NRL one-on-one strip, and not being able to PTB to oneself.

Six again is fine for me it just wants tweaking so that in your own 40 and on the first two tackles it’s a penalty ( which I think the NRL already does ).Agree with the NRL strip. Playing the ball to yourself would rarely happen nowadays as the players are so fit. You could only play it to yourself if no markers are in place which is very unusual in the modern game. 
 

Not so much a rule but I would like SL to bring in captains challenge and also the system the NRL use to award a try. Where they award it or not and then the VR checks it in the background whilst either the goal kick or the drop out is being set up. 

[StandOffHalf]

6 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Six again is fine for me it just wants tweaking so that in your own 40 and on the first two tackles it’s a penalty ( which I think the NRL already does ).Agree with the NRL strip. Playing the ball to yourself would rarely happen nowadays as the players are so fit. You could only play it to yourself if no markers are in place which is very unusual in the modern game. 
 

Not so much a rule but I would like SL to bring in captains challenge and also the system the NRL use to award a try. Where they award it or not and then the VR checks it in the background whilst either the goal kick or the drop out is being set up. 

Yes, you are probably correct about PTBs in the modern game. I'd still have it in the laws for the odd occasion when such a situation happens, and a quick-thinking player can utilise it.

I do think the NRL video ref system works well in general, but sometimes can deflate the moment with uncertainty. I would be in favour of the Captain's Challenge.

[bobbruce]

On 23/04/2024 at 16:41, DavidM said:

Indeed , often there’s an imbalance in terms of the rules being enforced depending on if you’re in possession or not . I’ve wrote about that before . In the NRL taking out the marker gets a ‘ go back and play the ball ‘ . Why ? Here if you move off the mark a ref says ‘ don’t move off the mark ‘ . Funnily enough when you’re running the clock down you can slow the ptb down as much as you want. Also if you take a penalty or restart from the wrong place or there’s men in front you shouldn’t be able to do it again . And you shouldn’t be able to run yards forward before kicking it . And don’t ignore offsides at kickoffs 

I’d like to see teams get penalised for pretending to be injured and deliberately slowing their own ptb down to waste time at the end of games. It would only take a few penalties to stop it. One player with an injury in a set maybe but 4 or 5 in the same set suddenly struggling to get up and ptb is a ###### take. 

[daz39]

I'd like to see 6-agains scrapped and go back to penalties, if we end up with 35 a game so be it, it will hopefully be a lesson to be learnt, 6 agains are more of a tactic these days than a punishment, award a penalty and a 30/40 metre territory loss and it'll soon stop some of the stuff that goes on now.

Mainly though it's more about enforcing the ones we do have and implementing them correctly, lots have been pointed out on in this thread already so it's pretty obvious where change is needed. 

[N2022]

On 23/04/2024 at 14:28, Dunbar said:

Unlike the author of the article, I would like us to take a harder line on the voluntary tackle law.

I would like the law to be amended to clarify that deliberately going to ground without being tackled is an offence and enforce that.

I lose count of the number of times across games that a player is bringing the ball away from his own in-goal and this should be a critical tackle, can he escape, can the opposition trap him in goal – and he just throws himself to the ground.  I think it is against the spirit of a game based on tackling and escaping tackles. 

Enforcing this would make the game more entertaining and competitive in my view.

Thanks for that insight. I'd never thought of the voluntary tackle under your own posts as a strategy to avoid being carried back over the line - have you seen anyone try it if outnumbered close to touch?

In tag, surrender rule existed but was not widely or consistently enforced. Better sides sometimes used it if the play was broken. defence was disorganised and the ball carrier had someone in support to receive the PTB, knowing most of the opposition team would be offside. Possibly best on last tackle to buy a fresh set as it would seem odd not to use a 2 on 1 by drawing and passing.

[Dunbar]

6 minutes ago, N2022 said:

Thanks for that insight. I'd never thought of the voluntary tackle under your own posts as a strategy to avoid being carried back over the line - have you seen anyone try it if outnumbered close to touch?

It certainly happens.  But it is not as obvious as a player coming out of his in goal (or close to it) is usually approaching the defence and then falling to the ground before contact whereas on the sideline, it is usually a laterally moving defence.

[sam4731]

I love that we have a game that is actually 80 minutes long as opposed to 80/90+ however long we want to tack on to the end. How many great finishes have we had because of the last tackle, emergency, chuck the ball anywhere tactic?

If I was to tweak it ever so slightly, I'd say that the team in possession gets one last play after the hooter even if they are mid tackle. Slowing the PTB down with 3 seconds on the clock shouldn't be an option to see out the game.

[bobbruce]

2 hours ago, sam4731 said:

I love that we have a game that is actually 80 minutes long as opposed to 80/90+ however long we want to tack on to the end. How many great finishes have we had because of the last tackle, emergency, chuck the ball anywhere tactic?

If I was to tweak it ever so slightly, I'd say that the team in possession gets one last play after the hooter even if they are mid tackle. Slowing the PTB down with 3 seconds on the clock shouldn't be an option to see out the game.

I wouldn’t  complain if once the hooter goes the team in possession could play out their set. Think it might create some more exiting finishes. 

Edited April 27 by bobbruce