One Ref

[unforgiven]

Teams will start kicking the ball into touch under Styarts instructions to get a scrum to get a rest

Confusing when 6 again gets called as the referee is not on the screen.

Teams hiwever can still control the ruck when they get fitter.

Lots of trials style errors.

I don't mind the kicking for touch to get a rest, this is at least a Rugby League skill to earn the break.

 

[lockyno1]

yep so far so good. Test will be in a few weeks when coaches have had time to counteract it with bs tactics

Am I seeing double?

You admitting the change was good? This after bagging the change when it was announced!

 

[Danish]

Didn't notice any downsides, so can't see this being anything but a success.

The game was fast paced and flowed well. One ref won't be a problem... the 6 again rule though will absolutely cause some major headaches throughout the season

 

[mave]

Really, really happy with the one ref, not so much with the six again.
I can see it being overused by some refs but time will tell.

 

[siv]

You may need 2 referees to to rule 6 again properly

I found it confusing on TV to understand when 6 again was called

Do we need a referee cam in the bottom left when in a ruck close up

 

[betcats]

Changes worked really well last night. It was a pleasure to watch without a referee constantly in the middle of the screen barking at the ruck.

 

[typicalfan]

You may need 2 referees to to rule 6 again properly

I found it confusing on TV to understand when 6 again was called

Do we need a referee cam in the bottom left when in a ruck close up

I wouldn't be holding my breath on that one. And no I don't think we need the cam, we are talking about minor ruck infringements and the game looked like it was flowing again.

 

[big hit!]

Didn't notice any downsides, so can't see this being anything but a success.

The game was fast paced and flowed well. One ref won't be a problem... the 6 again rule though will absolutely cause some major headaches throughout the season

there will be a lot of 'soft' tries and blow outs from the 6 again rule IMO. it means we'll see more tries through the hands rather than via kicks, but the lack of possession and tiredness killed the broncos last night. the the accumulated fatigue of the first lot of 6 agains caught up with them in the second half.

this was the first game and test for the new rule, so it may not be common, but logic suggests that the first team required to defend a 15 tackle set, concede a try off it and then defend again at the restart are going to be on the backfoot from the 60-min mark. Look at the tackle number last night and its predominantly Broncos at the top.

kicking the ball out may very well become a tactic, even if it means giving away possession. until Vlandys decides he doesn't like that either.

we may want to see continuous play, but have to realise the limitations of human physiology as well.

 

[betcats]

there will be a lot of 'soft' tries and blow outs from the 6 again rule IMO. it means we'll see more tries through the hands rather than via kicks, but the lack of possession and tiredness killed the broncos last night. the the accumulated fatigue of the first lot of 6 agains caught up with them in the second half.

this was the first game and test for the new rule, so it may not be common, but logic suggests that the first team required to defend a 15 tackle set, concede a try off it and then defend again at the restart are going to be on the backfoot from the 60-min mark. Look at the tackle number last night and its predominantly Broncos at the top.

kicking the ball out may very well become a tactic, even if it means giving away possession. until Vlandys decides he doesn't like that either.

we may want to see continuous play, but have to realise the limitations of human physiology as well.

They had completed 50 percent less sets than the eels late in the game last night. Their ball handling was woeful they should of conceded 50 points tbh. It took them 20 minutes in the second half to get out of their own half, they kept dropping the ball.

 

[Perth Red]

Am I seeing double?

You admitting the change was good? This after bagging the change when it was announced!

I bagged the way the Change was made, I’m a big fan of the one ref. The six again jury is still out for me. It’s going to cost someone a game at some point when they dont get a kick able penalty.

 

[unforgiven]

I bagged the way the Change was made, I’m a big fan of the one ref. The six again jury is still out for me. It’s going to cost someone a game at some point when they dont get a kick able penalty.

Well it won't cost them the game because they are not entitled to the penalty, just like a differential penalty, which we actually saw one last night.

 

[Perth Red]

Well it won't cost them the game because they are not entitled to the penalty, just like a differential penalty, which we actually saw one last night.

And there in lies the problem, they are, at the refs discretion. He can call 6 again or he can blow for a penalty. Watching last night suggests the refs edict is 6 again every time unless the holding causes a dropped or incorrect play of the ball then blow it as a penalty. As long as they stick to that then it will work, as soon as refs start interpreting to give 6 again or blow it as a penalty it will be a problem.

 

[betcats]

I thought there was a lot less wrestling and stoppages last night which is the what they are after.

If they are in penalty goal range 6 again gets them in range to score a try, more attacking footy and less penalty goals isnt a bad thing at all @Perth Red

Edit: I actually think less penalty goals would be a great result.

 

[unforgiven]

And there in lies the problem, they are, at the refs discretion. He can call 6 again or he can blow for a penalty. Watching last night suggests the refs edict is 6 again every time unless the holding causes a dropped or incorrect play of the ball then blow it as a penalty. As long as they stick to that then it will work, as soon as refs start interpreting to give 6 again or blow it as a penalty it will be a problem.

To blow a penalty a player has to go to the bin, it is no different to a player being binned for repeatedly holding down or committing a professional foul in the past.

 

[Perth Red]

To blow a penalty a player has to go to the bin, it is no different to a player being binned for repeatedly holding down or committing a professional foul in the past.

I thought it was an option after “multiple” infringements? Fair enough if that’s the case.
Certainly brought fatigue into the game last night, be interesting to see the effect on scorelines as season progresses.

 

[Frailty]

Here's some important factors to remembers:

• One game doesn't make a sample size. To call this a 'success' after one game is ridiculous.
• Neither the Broncos or Eels were known to be amongst the teams with the most wrestle.
• It was the first game back with a lot of build up - the intensity and pace was always going to be there.
• Commentators took a very rose-coloured look at the officiating. Paul Vautin said that the 10m looked like 7-8 a lot of the time - but it was for both teams so it's fine. That's not the usual perspective for commentators to have. Even forwarded passes they didn't agree with they responded with 'I don't know about that' and then would carry on.
• It hasn't sped up the play the ball area. The average PTB time for the Broncos was 3.4 seconds. This has compared to 3.48 and 3.53 in their previous two games (0.1 second faster). For the Eels, it was 4.03 seconds where previous games were 4 and 3.54 respectively. If we look at the PTB for their opponents - Eels opponents in Rounds 1 and 2 both had a PTB speed of 3.4 (exactly the same as the Broncos), whilst Broncos opponents 1 and 2 had PTB speeds of 3.87 and 3.75 (both faster than last night)
• "There was more ad lib play". Had more to do with Offloads which Parramatta dominated 20 to 5.
• "It brought fatigue back into the game" - I guess have an impromptu 9 weeks off where players couldn't train as a team had nothing to do with it.

I'm not saying it will be a failure, but can we just pull back on praising the changes after one game.

 

[Dragon Slayer]

Anything that can help nullify the Melbourne storm wrestle which is a stain on the game is a good thing. Just have to see how much it does effect this in the weeks ahead.

 

[unforgiven]

I thought it was an option after “multiple” infringements? Fair enough if that’s the case.
Certainly brought fatigue into the game last night, be interesting to see the effect on scorelines as season progresses.

Definately requires a sin binning to award a penalty

Significantly, any time the referee penalises a player for a professional foul or repeated infringements in the ruck, the offender will be automatically sent to the sin bin.

A repeated infringement scenario may arise where multiple "six-again" restarts have been awarded and, in the opinion of the referee, harsher action is required.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2020/05/15/sin-bin-risk-for-repeat-offenders-how-six-again-rule-will-work/

 

[Fangs]

I don't mind the kicking for touch to get a rest, this is at least a Rugby League skill to earn the break.

My view as well. It's a crucial part of game management. It's hard enough anyway as the back 3 do such a great job covering it these days.

 

[big hit!]

• "It brought fatigue back into the game" - I guess have an impromptu 9 weeks off where players couldn't train as a team had nothing to do with it.

Folks want fatigue in the game, but what we saw last night was fatigue heavily proportioned to one team as the Broncos were the ones to concede the first couple of 6 agains and concede tries so have much more to do in defence. If that becomes the trend, then expect blowouts. Those Parra tries in the second half were soft as butter.

Yes, fatigue is expected but if it becomes disproportionate in most games, is it really good for the game?