Female Refs

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

Just to add. A tackle is complete if the player with the ball is on the ground and a defender touches them - the ball and/or ball carrying arm doesn't need to touch the ground.

This is the exact wording -

A player in possession is tackled:

(a) When he is held by one or more opposing players and the ball or the hand or arm holding the ball comes into contact with the ground.

(b) When he is held by one or more opposing players in such a manner that he can make no further progress and cannot part with the ball.

(c) When, being held by an opponent, the tackled player makes it evident that he has succumbed to the tackle and wishes to be released in order to play the ball.

(d) When he is lying on the ground and an opponent places a hand on him.

Maybe watch more games because it does happen. JAC is regularly dragged on the ground towards the touch line and throw it back inside. But.. in the exact same scenario if he was being dragged back towards his own 'in goal' you can guarantee the referee would call held ... but not the sideline.

When the ref should call Held is a different matter.

My reply was to this claim -

except if they are going into touch. In that situation players routinely throw the ball back infield after their ball carrying arm has touched the ground without penalty.

I have never seen a player going into touch allowed to pass the ball after the ball-carrying arm has touched the ground.

 

[gerg]

This is the exact wording -

A player in possession is tackled:

(a) When he is held by one or more opposing players and the ball or the hand or arm holding the ball comes into contact with the ground.

(b) When he is held by one or more opposing players in such a manner that he can make no further progress and cannot part with the ball.

(c) When, being held by an opponent, the tackled player makes it evident that he has succumbed to the tackle and wishes to be released in order to play the ball.

(d) When he is lying on the ground and an opponent places a hand on him.


When the ref should call Held is a different matter.

My reply was to this claim -

I have never seen a player going into touch allowed to pass the ball after the ball-carrying arm has touched the ground.

Yes I know and I've seen plenty of times where a player is being dragged into touch and throws the ball back.

 

[Penrith fan]

It seems the NRL have thrown their toys out of the cot and said that now any time anyone questions a referee's decision, they can be marched back or given ten in the bin.

Total over-reaction and it will only create more drama and more headaches and a bigger divide between players and referees.

 

[Frailty]

It seems the NRL have thrown their toys out of the cot and said that now any time anyone questions a referee's decision, they can be marched back or given ten in the bin.

Total over-reaction and it will only create more drama and more headaches and a bigger divide between players and referees.

Funny, for years I kept hearing that part of the problem was referees referring to players by name rather than their number and were too chummy with players. Now you're saying increasing the divide will be worse.

All it tells me is that it doesn't matter what they decide, people will complain about refereeing - like they always did.

 

[PARRA_FAN]

It seems the NRL have thrown their toys out of the cot and said that now any time anyone questions a referee's decision, they can be marched back or given ten in the bin.

Total over-reaction and it will only create more drama and more headaches and a bigger divide between players and referees.

Are they talking about players who are not captains? If so, why now? I just wonder when referees started to lose control of this. I remember the referees like Harrigan, Hampstead, Simpkins would sent someone to the bin or send off for a slight back chat. Harrigan had good ears when he sin binned a winger for saying "Oh cmon Bill"

Coaches will blow up about this no doubt

 

[Valheru]

Warriors vs Raiders

There were 3 successful captains challenge in that whole game.

Badger had 4 the other day as well as many other wrong decisions and losing control of the game.

 

[Danish]

Not if no defender is in contact.

Substantive point was that passing off the ground is not intrinsically illegal. Only after a tackle is complete.


I've never seen that happen.


The surrender tackle interpretation supersedes the voluntary tackle rule.

I see amendments like this as akin to the practice of abrogation in religious texts. It isn't necessary to redraft and republish the formal rulebook after every ad hoc revision.

Bear in mind, my previous reply was to this post -


The laws of RL are sufficiently clear and enforceable.

Our abiding problem is that their application is a more complex exercise than many, particularly in the media, have been led to believe.

I can only assume you don’t watch much league then if you’ve never seen a player pass back infield off the ground. It happens weekly.

the rule book is literally edited and published every year. It is what is used to officiate every game of amateur league on earth.

the NRL also releases its “interpretations” guide annually, which often contradicts rules in the same rule book from the same year.

 

[Penrith fan]

Rugby League's biggest problem is its relationship between Referees and Players and the Bunker.

And the problems are on both sides and with the NRL head office administration.

Talk to referees, don't talk to referees, captains challenge of the referee, bunker challenge of the referee.

The set up has never been less organised and more controversial.

 

[skeepe]

There were 3 successful captains challenge in that whole game.

Badger had 4 the other day as well as many other wrong decisions and losing control of the game.

Context is important. The 3 successful challenges all happened in a row, against the same team, and the 4th challenge should have been successful too but for an inexplicable call from the bunker (which had already made several baffling decisions on the night).

Even putting aside my bias, it was one of the worst officiated games I have ever seen.

 

[Penrith fan]

Really the bunker stuffing decisions up puts a lot of pressure on the Referees.

The Referees know the decision from the bunker is wrong, but they have to justify it to the players.

There is no confidence in the system at the moment.

 

[Penrith fan]

MSN

Fans pay your wage Billy so back off. There is no need to make this a gender issue. Badgar had a bad game and was called out for it.

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

Yes I know and I've seen plenty of times where a player is being dragged into touch and throws the ball back.

Before a call of Held. And before the ball-carrying arm has touched the ground. Whether the ref should have called Held is a separate question.

On that subject, this clause in the rulebook is germane:

Moving tackled player - "Where opponents do not make a tackle effective in the quickest possible manner but attempt to push, pull or carry the player in possession, it is permissible for colleagues of the tackled player to lend their weight in order to avoid losing ground. Immediately this happens, the referee should call Held".

Note the phrase "avoid losing ground" because it's clear, as you said earlier, that officials allow more latitude for post-contact momentum when the direction is sideways rather than backwards.

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

I can only assume you don’t watch much league then if you’ve never seen a player pass back infield off the ground. It happens weekly.

Post the evidence, next time you see a player allowed to pass after a tackle was complete. Start this weekend.

In 44 years of watching Rugby League, the only time I've witnessed such a faux pas is in developing nations where the players and officials are more familiar with the rules of Rugby Union.

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

It seems the NRL have thrown their toys out of the cot and said that now any time anyone questions a referee's decision, they can be marched back or given ten in the bin.

Total over-reaction and it will only create more drama and more headaches and a bigger divide between players and referees.

Do 50-metre penalties provoke similar acrimony?

 

[Penrith fan]

Any time a referee calls a decision on one team and then the same thing happens to the other team, and it doesn't get called, the supporters have a right to be upset.

 

[Penrith fan]

I get that making decisions in the moment is hard for the on field referees so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt there; but when the bunker misses players offside from a kick chase who have a direct impact in scoring a try from that kick while they have all this supposed technology at their hands is absolutely inexcusable in my opinion
The big issue is the Bunker somehow making incorrect decision despite having the the advantage of time, and the ability to watch replays from all angles. I don’t really have any issue with the on field referees, except that I think we should go back to 2 referees.

The worst example was Casey Badger explaining in detail that Toby Couchman has grounded the ball, as well as crossed over the tryline, yet said it wasn’t a try. She quite literally gave the definition of a try in explaining herself, but still reached the decision of no-try.

Surely the Bunker should be its own position too, instead of having all the referees rotate through the position. Surely it should be the same ~3 people in the Bunker every game for consistency purposes, and that’s their only job. I feel like that’s what it was at the start but it’s gone away from that,

 

[Meth]

Badger lost control of this game too. Fortunately for her, the Roosters put the Warriors out of the game in the first 20 minutes. But she clearly has an issue controlling the game. She’s not up to it.

 

[Penrith fan]

This is the problem the NRL have now, if they dump Casey Badgar, they will be accused of doing it because she is a woman.

So, they have to just suck it up and pray she only makes small time errors.

The Toby Couchman explaination was just wrong.

Again, she wasn't the only bad referee on the weekend.

There were plenty of her male counterparts who were also horrid.

 

[Meth]

Yes. Her being poor doesn't really have much at all (if anything) with her being a woman and she isn’t the only poor referee. But she is poor.

Her performance on the weekend probably won’t grab headlines. To be honest, I didn’t think she was at all well supported in the back end of the first half, which may have contributed to her ultimately losing control in the second.

 

[Penrith fan]

Kasey has lost control in her last 3 games at some stage of the contest and that has to be worrying for the NRL.

But the NRL don't seem to care anymore.