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!

News Coronavirus and NRL

Valheru

Coach
Messages
19,178
It's going to be great to see a team up by 2 points late happily slowing down the play the ball without fear of the losing the lead.

It's going to be great to see a team coming out of their own end now not having the opportunity to commence play further down the field when the opposition interferes in the ruck.

I can live with one referee. I don't think it would change the game that much (or at least hope) and I think if the referees' bosses use it effectively it could improve competition amongst the referee ranks in normal circumstances.

However, why would they drop to one referee without consultation after they have trained the last 10 years in a 2 referee system AND add a new rule to apply? Good way to confuse referees for no real reason at all.

Penalty is still an option i believe which makes the thing even more silly.

Agree with what you say.

The players are just going to hold down even more. By the time the ref yells 6 again and the player finally gets up the line will be set without 2 points being conceded.

Changing to one ref at this point in time is completely ridiculous. I have no problem with 1 ref as an idea but as you say, the refs have been trained a certain way to officiate and they really need a full off season at least to change thinking and implement effectively.
 

Frailty

First Grade
Messages
9,454
Penalty is still an option i believe which makes the thing even more silly.

Agree with what you say.

The players are just going to hold down even more. By the time the ref yells 6 again and the player finally gets up the line will be set without 2 points being conceded.

Changing to one ref at this point in time is completely ridiculous. I have no problem with 1 ref as an idea but as you say, the refs have been trained a certain way to officiate and they really need a full off season at least to change thinking and implement effectively.

This is just ridiculous. I mean, how many fans already think that the NRL and Referees have it out for their team, now they're giving those people another area to claim bias and rigging.
 

franklin2323

Immortal
Messages
33,546
Maybe the option could be to start a new set of six or kick for goal. I don't know how I'd work that exactly though.

You want to speed it up. I’d back the attacking side to score more often then not in the situation. People are getting outraged for the sake of it I think
 

Frailty

First Grade
Messages
9,454
You want to speed it up. I’d back the attacking side to score more often then not in the situation. People are getting outraged for the sake of it I think

Nice. 20 seconds to go, and you're team is 1 point behind. You're going to be ok with the referee calling six again, rather than a penalty that would win your team the game?
 
  • Like
Reactions: siv

Timmah

LeagueUnlimited News Editor
Staff member
Messages
100,985
Peter V’landys says the NRL is literally working around the clock to produce a new season draw as broadcaster demands and anti-vaxxers hold up the tenuous process.

The NRL is rushing to finalise a new-look 20-round competition in time for the May 28 season relaunch and may have to release the entire schedule after the premiership restarts.

The draw is generally a logistical nightmare, usually taking months to produce by a Canadian firm due to the numerous factors that have to be taken into account.

The NRL is attempting to produce a balanced competition in a matter of weeks and is still negotiating a new broadcast deal with Channel 9 and Foxtel a fortnight out from the mooted start.

Despite cutting it fine, ARL Commission chairman V’landys remains confident the NRL will kick-off on May 28 even if it means only settling on the first few rounds of games and finalising the draw at a later date.

“We’re working on it to get it done as quickly as possible, even if we’ve got an indication of a couple of rounds,” V’landys said.

“People don’t realise how complicated it is. It’s very complicated. It uses an algorithm and it takes 24 hours each time you do one.

“We’ve got to let the broadcasters do their bit and then we do our bit and it’s very complicated.”

The NRL must try to appease the demands of broadcasters and requests of clubs while creating a fair competition in a short period of time.

The banning of players who have rejected the flu vaccination from playing in Queensland has also thrown a spanner in the works.

The NRL wants to retain the integrity of the premiership and not having some of the game’s top players, like Canberra’s Josh Papalii, allowed to play in Queensland has created unwanted headaches at League Central.

V’landys said he was focused on finalising the broadcast deal and draw within the next week.

“The draw and finalising the broadcast deals are the two big ones for me,” he said.

“If we can start on the 28th of May that will be fantastic. There’s no reason why we won’t.

“We said the infection rate (of COVID-19) would be near zero by the 28th of May and sure enough it is.”

The North Queensland Cowboys are one team sweating on the release of the draw due to their taxing travel commitments.

With teams to travel to and from games on the same day, the Cowboys have requested only night games to ensure they don’t have to leave Townsville unnecessarily early.

The Cowboys flew to Sydney on a game day charter flight for their Round 2 match against the Bulldogs and won.

Cowboys football chief Peter Parr said the club had responded well to the travel changes.

“With the Warriors now in Australia, we will have to travel more than any other team,” he said.

“We are used to that, but we would like some consideration given to avoiding 3pm games at least because that would require a very early start with travel.

“We feel that would compromise our preparation somewhat. We also have to take into account that Sydney clubs have to travel to Townsville as well.

“We need to talk to the players in more depth about how they handled the travel for that Bulldogs game (in Round 2).

“There’s no doubt it went well. Doing it once is one thing, but doing that for the next four or five months will be the test.”

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/s...w/news-story/af4de905ef1dd8abc9d1c01c9cee0966
 

Quicksilver

Bench
Messages
4,355
You want to speed it up. I’d back the attacking side to score more often then not in the situation. People are getting outraged for the sake of it I think

I wouldn't back that.

I think the attacking side would usually prefer to stay on the attack. But I'm not sure they score most of the time.

The option of a goal kick prevents the defence from just cynically giving away 6 again in the above outlined situation. But 90% of the attacking team will probably just go with 6 again anyway.
 

Jerkwad2000

Juniors
Messages
114
You want to speed it up. I’d back the attacking side to score more often then not in the situation. People are getting outraged for the sake of it I think

So team A make a break. Fullback makes a tackle. Attacking team have 6 players lined up out wide with a huge overlap. Fullback just lays there to allow his team to get back onside.

It's not a penalty, it's 6 again. It's not a sin bin, cause it's not repeated behaviour.

You can't have an action that has different outcomes depending on circs. It's either always 6 again or never 6 again, and always a penalty or never.
 

franklin2323

Immortal
Messages
33,546
So team A make a break. Fullback makes a tackle. Attacking team have 6 players lined up out wide with a huge overlap. Fullback just lays there to allow his team to get back onside.

It's not a penalty, it's 6 again. It's not a sin bin, cause it's not repeated behaviour.

You can't have an action that has different outcomes depending on circs. It's either always 6 again or never 6 again, and always a penalty or never.

The rule is the ref can blow a penalty or 6 again. In that case would be the bin

Where the 6 again is better is for those times where a team is on their line and need a rest so hold down. Knowing they won’t get sin binned and can have a breather and reset
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,549
So team A make a break. Fullback makes a tackle. Attacking team have 6 players lined up out wide with a huge overlap. Fullback just lays there to allow his team to get back onside.

It's not a penalty, it's 6 again. It's not a sin bin, cause it's not repeated behaviour.

You can't have an action that has different outcomes depending on circs. It's either always 6 again or never 6 again, and always a penalty or never.

Sometimes we just make rule changes to screw the refs over I'm sure! Not to mention no rule should be changed unless ratified by the IRL and adopted in all countries. We are supposed to be one international sport ffs!
 

League Unlimited News

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
8,680
Referees have flagged the prospect of strike action over the decision to revert to one referee as their union prepares to lodge a dispute notice with the Fair Work Commission today.

As first revealed by The Sun-Herald, the match officials and their union, the Professional Rugby League Match Officials Incorporated (PRLMO), is considering the prospect of industrial action over the NRL’s planned changes to officiating protocols. The PRLMO believes the lack of consultation constitutes a breach of the enterprise bargaining agreement they recently signed with head office.

The development is a potential blow to the NRL’s plan to resume the competition on May 28. It is also the first serious internal backlash to an idea championed by Australian Rugby League Commission chairman Peter V’landys, who has enjoyed majority stakeholder backing to the game’s broader response to the coronavirus outbreak.

Asked if the referees are prepared to strike over the proposed change, PRLMO chairman Silvio Del Vecchio told the Herald on Thursday: “We won’t rule that out.

“It is definitely something we don’t want to do. We want conciliation rather than confrontation with the NRL.”

The ARLC on Thursday night approved the decision to go back to one referee for the first time in more than a decade, as well as introducing a six-again rule that would replace penalties for ruck infringements. The NRL believes the changes will improve the flow of the game while also reducing operating costs.

Rugby League Central made the decision against the advice of the game's most respected stakeholders, whose representatives were assembled earlier in the week to pressure-test the proposal. The NRL forged ahead despite the feedback of a consultation group that included Wayne Pearce, Graham Annesley, Jason King, Trent Robinson, Michael Maguire, Daly Cherry-Evans, Wade Graham, Cooper Cronk, Don Furner, Bernard Sutton, Matt Cecchin and Clint Newton. The Rugby League Coaches Association also indicated at least 10 of the 16 head coaches wanted the status quo to remain.

Del Vecchio claimed referees boss Bernard Sutton informed him of plans to scrap the two-referee model via a phone call last Friday at 5.24pm - just six minutes before a Zoom meeting was scheduled to break the news to the referees.

“Which employer in Australia changes the entire structure of the department without consulting the employees?” Del Veccio asked. “These are industrial relations matters.

“People will ask me if this will stall the competition on May 28; no it doesn’t.

“We aim to have this resolved well and truly before then. We are keen for the game to go ahead as we know it, not some cheapened version of it that has been such a tremendous spectacle over the last decade.

“We are determined that by 28 May … (the game will) go ahead, and will be officiated under the current model that has been tested and successful for more than a decade.

Del Veccio added that the removal of the pocket referee would have safety implications, claiming head knocks and high tackles were more likely to go undetected.

“It is in the best interests of the safety of all players, coaches, the officials, fans, and the integrity of the game itself," he said.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/nr...-action-over-rule-change-20200514-p54swo.html
 

Penrose Warrior

First Grade
Messages
9,453
That's over $4k a year for every NRL player. Not really to be sneezed at.

Far from enough of a reason to change the system, unless it's deemed the choice they think is best. I can't see them saying hey we'd probably rather have 2 refs but let's drop $2m out, even though it's a drop in the ocean in our operating budget.
 

Latest posts

Top