Long Hair

[besthalfbackPEARCE]

Should NRL players be allowed to have long hair if it gives them an advantage that if another tackler grabs hair accidently in the heat of a tackle it results in a penalty?

 

[Drax]

I dont think the Roosters reason for losing today was simply because of that penalty givin away over the grabbing of Jamals hair.

 

[gsweeper]

should NRL players be allowed to have heads if it gives them an advantage that if a tackler goes high in the heat of a tackle it results in a penalty?

If anything, if a player wants to have long hair, they put themselves in a position of getting it pulled, i've played footy with a lot of people who have had long hair, and in the heat of a tackle I have never had the urge to grab their hair....

 

[Marshall_magic]

Thread raises a good point. All players should have to shave their hair before every game.

 

[adamkungl]

lol dumb thread. Not as dumb as Jason Ryles though.

 

[Tigers_are_Pro]

Unless you can see there's clear intent in pulling the hair, then it shouldn't be a penalty.

I'd say Ryles was trying to grab the top of Idris' jumper rather than his hair and happened to get a handful of it instead. It's terrible luck to cop a penalty for that.

 

[cleary89]

i thought bs penalty.

 

[adamkungl]

lol dumb thread. Not as dumb as Jason Ryles though.

 

[besthalfbackPEARCE]

For those of you mocking the thread just think about it for a second.

Scenario = hair goes down around shoulders = prevents one from making an effective tackle around shoulders as it leads to hair pulling.

They have OH&S rules about long hair in trades and workshops so why not in contact sport? Hair should be at a reasonable length or at least wear headgear to hold the hair up.

 

[Mr Angry]

Well no there should be no rule.

There should however be some pride in being a man.

Pig tails are for females (little girls), man the f**k up.

 

[adamkungl]

f**k these database errors

 

[Eels Dude]

should NRL players be allowed to have heads if it gives them an advantage that if a tackler goes high in the heat of a tackle it results in a penalty?

If anything, if a player wants to have long hair, they put themselves in a position of getting it pulled, i've played footy with a lot of people who have had long hair, and in the heat of a tackle I have never had the urge to grab their hair....

This. It's a contact sport. Of course players should be allowed to have long hair if they want, but be aware of the risk that you might get opposition players may acting grubby and pulling it from time to time. And if that really bothers a player, well get a haircut.

 

[Eels Dude]

should NRL players be allowed to have heads if it gives them an advantage that if a tackler goes high in the heat of a tackle it results in a penalty?

If anything, if a player wants to have long hair, they put themselves in a position of getting it pulled, i've played footy with a lot of people who have had long hair, and in the heat of a tackle I have never had the urge to grab their hair....

This. It's a contact sport. Of course players should be allowed to have long hair if they want, but be aware of the risk that you might get opposition players may acting grubby and pulling it from time to time. And if that really bothers a player, well get a haircut.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Finally a sensible thread on this forum. Every player should have his hair measured before each match. If it's longer than 10mm they should be taken out the back and shot.

 

[Spanner in the works]

If you are so stupid to pull someone's hair and give away a penalty you shouldn't be playing first grade. It's becoming the story of the Roosters. Forget the supposed bias and 50/50 calls that go against us. Stupid penalties are costing us games and Ryles is fast becoming our biggest offender.

 

[besthalfbackPEARCE]

should NRL players be allowed to have heads if it gives them an advantage that if a tackler goes high in the heat of a tackle it results in a penalty?

If anything, if a player wants to have long hair, they put themselves in a position of getting it pulled, i've played footy with a lot of people who have had long hair, and in the heat of a tackle I have never had the urge to grab their hair....

The difference is that every NRL player has a head, while only a select few have long hair, which puts them at an advantageous position to gain penalties.

 

[Whos Ya Daddy]

Unless it appears intentional it should be play on.

I would think this would come under that "common sense" that Hollywood was supposed to be bringing back into the officiating.

As for changes in officiating... I've only seen pedantic bullsh*t.

 

[manly40gimps0]

Should you be allowed to post dumb moronic threads? I think not.

 

[bulldog]

The difference is that every NRL player has a head, while only a select few have long hair, which puts them at an advantageous position to gain penalties.

Agreed, ban short players too, little fu^%kers have a good chance of pulling penalties for a high shot, tall players have to go as well to be fair, some of the chins on these blokes have me concerned too - not fair on anyone with big shoulders trying to get under them to make a tackle.

 

[Danish]

I dont think the Roosters reason for losing today was simply because of that penalty givin away over the grabbing of Jamals hair.

I'd say the bigger turning point was JWH getting penalized for "holding on" after chopping down I believe Paea near half way around the legs, despite the new rules reading:

- Defenders will be rewarded for making a good 'legs' tackle, with referees allowing them more time. They will also be allowed, within reason, to spin on top if they are the lone defender in order to get to marker;

Dogs scored off the ensuing set to go in at half time up by 2 instead of down by 4