What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rule Interpretation - Refs 100% strict on players catching the ball inside decoy runner

hellteam

First Grade
Messages
6,529
I am behind this rule. They need to keep it up. It's black and white, if you catch the ball inside a decoy runner it's a penalty.

I'd argue the refs actually need to call it more - not just after video ref when a try has been scored. I saw a ref call it in the Warriors game the other day, when no try was scored.

It seems like in the last 10 years the only tactic teams have is the second man play. It's repetitive and boring. This rule might go some way into making coaches more creative and think of different ways to break open a defence.

Although I am pretty certain they are going to bow to media pressure and it's going to go back to normal within about 4 weeks.....
 

Quidgybo

Bench
Messages
3,052
Everyone just wants the refs to be consistent... until they don’t. It’s one of those Rugby League curses. Week after week we hear fans and commentators say “I’m happy with that call as long as they’re consistent” then the moment it pulls up their favourite play it’s now “the refs are being pedantic” or “they’re looking for reasons to take away tries” or “we need refs who have a feel for the game” (ie. who are deliberately inconsistent based on the state of the game). I really wish folks would make their mind up which way they want it and be... consistent.

Leigh.
 

Shorty

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
15,555
Everyone just wants the refs to be consistent... until they don’t. It’s one of those Rugby League curses. Week after week we hear fans and commentators say “I’m happy with that call as long as they’re consistent” then the moment it pulls up their favourite play it’s now “the refs are being pedantic” or “they’re looking for reasons to take away tries” or “we need refs who have a feel for the game” (ie. who are deliberately inconsistent based on the state of the game). I really wish folks would make their mind up which way they want it and be... consistent.

Leigh.
Should be stickied tbh.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
34,155
Everyone just wants the refs to be consistent... until they don’t. It’s one of those Rugby League curses. Week after week we hear fans and commentators say “I’m happy with that call as long as they’re consistent” then the moment it pulls up their favourite play it’s now “the refs are being pedantic” or “they’re looking for reasons to take away tries” or “we need refs who have a feel for the game” (ie. who are deliberately inconsistent based on the state of the game). I really wish folks would make their mind up which way they want it and be... consistent.

Leigh.

100% this.
 
Messages
14,032
When you think about other sports, and all the rules they have, you can explain the rules to someone who doesn't follow the sport, even if they are a little obscure (LBW in cricket, offside in soccer, infield fly in baseball, etc). I would have no idea how to explain the obstruction rule to someone. It seems every time the referees try and work this out it is a disaster, although I think this season they may finally have it right. We are only 2 rounds in but we haven't had any major sooks about it, and we've barely heard is discussed, which is refreshing.
 

Lemon Squash

First Grade
Messages
7,982
Doing my head in that everyone has been whinging about the play the ball the last couple of years. So the refs have listened and aimed up and decided to start penalising it this year to try and fix it up.

But now everyone is blowing up that there are too many penalties being awarded ‘they’re not letting the game flow’ it’s one thing or the other... merkins just like to whinge.
 

OldPanther

Coach
Messages
13,404
When you think about other sports, and all the rules they have, you can explain the rules to someone who doesn't follow the sport, even if they are a little obscure (LBW in cricket, offside in soccer, infield fly in baseball, etc). I would have no idea how to explain the obstruction rule to someone. It seems every time the referees try and work this out it is a disaster, although I think this season they may finally have it right. We are only 2 rounds in but we haven't had any major sooks about it, and we've barely heard is discussed, which is refreshing.

Have you tried other football forums. Every second comment on the kennel is how the refs are out to get them.
 

Grapple

Bench
Messages
4,612
NRL fans, players and clubs whinge about the game > NRL Refs boss whinges about the rules and the refs > Refs whinge about the players and coaches > fans whinge about the players, coaches and the refs and refs boss > other fans whinge about other fans whinging > other clubs whinge about other clubs fans who are whinging about other fans whinging about refs whinging about players and coaches whinging about the game...

200.gif
 

ReddFelon

Juniors
Messages
1,485
Doing my head in that everyone has been whinging about the play the ball the last couple of years. So the refs have listened and aimed up and decided to start penalising it this year to try and fix it up.

But now everyone is blowing up that there are too many penalties being awarded ‘they’re not letting the game flow’ it’s one thing or the other... merkins just like to whinge.


I was actually annoyed that the play the ball hasn't been policed as heavily as the preseason trials suggested. In the Newcastle/Manly game I kept expecting Fonua-Blake to get pinged early, he had about six plays of just rolling it like tunnel ball, instead it took until midway through the second half for them to finally get sick of it. More play the ball penalties until tunnel ball is eliminated.
 
Messages
15,545
How about we just blow penalties for obstruction when someone is actually obstructed?

All this BS about inside shoulders and decoy runners going through the line... The rule shouldn't be that hard.

You look at the play and if a defender is unable to make a tackle because of interference from another attacking player, it's a penalty. If an attacking player with the ball runs behind his team mate with ball in hand, its a shepherd and also a penalty.

Interpretation was ok for years and years then they suddenly changed it for no reason. Ever since, whatever they've come up with to try to rationalise it has been balls.

Just go back to the way it was.
 

hellteam

First Grade
Messages
6,529
How about we just blow penalties for obstruction when someone is actually obstructed?

All this BS about inside shoulders and decoy runners going through the line... The rule shouldn't be that hard.

You look at the play and if a defender is unable to make a tackle because of interference from another attacking player, it's a penalty. If an attacking player with the ball runs behind his team mate with ball in hand, its a shepherd and also a penalty.

Interpretation was ok for years and years then they suddenly changed it for no reason. Ever since, whatever they've come up with to try to rationalise it has been balls.

Just go back to the way it was.

2 hit ups, second man play, hit up, second man play.

This is all teams have done for years.

If teams are getting penalties blown against them for not executing their second man plays to the letter of the law - good in my opinion. Find another way to score, the game will evolve.
 

Someguy

First Grade
Messages
6,699
Best thread on LU well done sir.

I would also like any decoy player stopping once he reaches the defensive line to be automatic penalties. It ruins the defences ability to slide and cover an overlap but some how is not deemed obstruction cause it didn't happen right next to the line break. It's pretty clear that the majority of 'decoys' are not there to fool anyone but to simply interfere with the defence
 

Life's Good

Coach
Messages
13,971
I’ve found the crack down on the PTB & the inside/outside catch a real positive in the first couple of rounds. A definite improvement.
It’s a far cry from the Daniel Anderson days where even the slightest touch of a defender, by anyone from the attacking side, was enough for the try to be disallowed.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,165
It’s a far cry from the Daniel Anderson days where even the slightest touch of a defender, by anyone from the attacking side, was enough for the try to be disallowed.

You realise that if we stuck with that sensible interpretation that the monstrosity that is the decoy would be gone from the game by now.
 

Life's Good

Coach
Messages
13,971
You realise that if we stuck with that sensible interpretation that the monstrosity that is the decoy would be gone from the game by now.
So you we’re happy for try to be disallowed because a player, from the attacking side, made contact with someone in the defensive line who was at least 2 players away from where the contact was made?
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,165
So you we’re happy for try to be disallowed because a player, from the attacking side, made contact with someone in the defensive line who was at least 2 players away from where the contact was made?

Yes if he was a decoy, because the merkin was offside. If a defender who is within the 10 gets even minutely involved it is a penalty.
I have wanted an end to the monstrosity of decoys for at least 5 years. Ando's interpretation would have delivered that.
 
Top