France v Australia match now officially Test status

[screeny]

Read on another thread a quote by Colin Love saying the Toulouse match was belatedly granted Test status.

While some people would hail this as great for France, Cooper, Tate etc personally I think it stinks.

Test football has rules and regs and they were quite flagrantly flouted in this match, with five subs allowed.

Rugby league is a joke sport when it does things like this. We need a concrete set of rules and regs and we need to stick to them! Totally pathetic.

What're the Aussie RL going to do next, not put the Ashes up for grabs until after the result and then decide?

RL, sometimes, deserves all the bad press it gets.

 

[alexisUK]

Yes. Agreed. Why can't people decide things and stick to them?

 

[griff]

Rugby league is a joke sport when it does things like this. We need a concrete set of rules and regs and we need to stick to them! Totally pathetic.

Absolutely agree with you screeny, although I am fighting a losing battle arguing exactly the same thing on the Aus/USA thread!

 

[Razor]

Test football has rules and regs and they were quite flagrantly flouted in this match, with five subs allowed.

They weren't flouted. The international rules allow for 5 subs.

The NRL isn't played under international rules

Same as in the US - NHL isn't played under international hockey rules, NBA isn't played under international basketball rules, etc.

If you want the rules to be the same as the NRL, ask the NRL to change the rules to match the international rules.

 

[PARRA_FAN]

I'm happy it is a test now, but it shouldve been a test match before hand instead playing with 5 reserves. Then again the NRL has played with 6 reserves in the early part of 2000.

I hope to play France in the future.

 

[carlnz]

France always treated the match as a test an awardard their players a test for the match...RLIF turned around and said to Australia that it was a test

 

[simostorm]

These rules are introduced in the best interest of these underdog clubs, France/US ect. It helps keep the scoreline close, and its working! When these clubs get better you will see these rules revert back to normal.

 

[griff]

If you want the rules to be the same as the NRL, ask the NRL to change the rules to match the international rules.

That isn't what this argument is about. If international rules differ from NRL rules then that is fine.

The argument is that we should stick to a standard set of rules and regs for international football, rather than deciding on which rules to use in an ad hoc fashion for each game.

 

[screeny]

Test football has rules and regs and they were quite flagrantly flouted in this match, with five subs allowed.

They weren't flouted. The international rules allow for 5 subs.

The NRL isn't played under international rules

Same as in the US - NHL isn't played under international hockey rules, NBA isn't played under international basketball rules, etc.

If you want the rules to be the same as the NRL, ask the NRL to change the rules to match the international rules.

Since when? I've never ever seen an official international, Test or World Cup match with anything other than four subs used.

Test footy is four subs, not five.

 

[griff]

I believe the official laws of the game still say up to 4 replacements are allowed per side (as international RL was played in the early 90s) but allowing individual domestic competitions to vary that if they see fit.

 

[screeny]

Dunno where Razor got his info from, but it's definitely four subs......

 

[Booyah]

It should have been a test match in the first place. I wonder if players who earned their cap from this i.e. Bowen, Cooper etc will have an * marked next to their name, as an indicator the match was played under different rules.

 

[Razor]

n? I've never ever seen an official international, Test or World Cup match with anything other than four subs used.

There was one 2 weeks ago - Australia v France - Official test - 5 subs

There's plenty of others as well.

They usually have 4, but the rules allow for more.

 

[screeny]

Razor,

Name one official Test or World Cup match with more than five subs.

Where do you get this idea that official int'l rules allow five subs?!

It's clearly four....

 

[yakstorm]

Screeny, Griff, you do raise some good points, but you also have put forward the assumption that we live in a vaccumn and that all situations are the same.

Whether it be field size, drink breaks after 20 minutes, the number of substitutions or the style of interchange are all things that can be influenced by the surrounding environment.

In reality, if both sides are forced to play under the same conditions, shouldn't that be test enough? Australia is no weaker with 5 subs than 4, whilst it might mean the French are a bit fresher, they will have to work harder cause so will the Australians.

Technically, we should rule out all the Tri-Nations matches as tests, cause they played under the 4/12 interchange rule, when the international laws still have 'unlimited interchange' in there, something which surprisingly hasn't been update, but is still the case.

Field sizes, well thats pretty straight forward they are affected by whats available. Say if USA was a test match, well good luck finding a much wider field in the USA. Even Union in the US, for matches they take to stadiums is played in a thinner than international standard field. To say move it to another ground which is wide enough generally in a lot of cases isn't practical, either economically, or some other reason/

20 minute breaks, they are allowed under international rules for extremes in weather, generally for extreme heat, but they can be taken also in extreme cold, if say Australia V GB needed that, which is quite possible if you play a Tri-Nations down under, especially when we just had a 40C day only yesterday, it would be suicide to prevent it cause it has not been used in past tests. When you have players health and even lives at risk, you have to leave gaps open for their safety. Thats where Razor's information about allowing 5 interchange is acctually correct, there are situations in the laws which do allow for 5 interchange, heat is one, safety is another, and generally if both sides agree to it.

Trust me this is an issue (uniform rules) which has been raised many, many many times, but it is a very big thing which would need a task force to do it, and quite frankly the RLIF, and other stakeholders have far more important things to spend their money on.

 

[Razor]

omething which surprisingly hasn't been update, but is still the case.

It won't be updated. Australia, NZ, and England are the only 3 countries that don't want unlimited interchanges. They don't the numbers with Wales, Scotland, France, Russia, etc. all supporting unlimited interchange.

 

[screeny]

Screeny, Griff, you do raise some good points, but you also have put forward the assumption that we live in a vaccumn and that all situations are the same.

Whether it be field size, drink breaks after 20 minutes, the number of substitutions or the style of interchange are all things that can be influenced by the surrounding environment.

Not arguing that point but Test rules should be uniform

In reality, if both sides are forced to play under the same conditions, shouldn't that be test enough? Australia is no weaker with 5 subs than 4, whilst it might mean the French are a bit fresher, they will have to work harder cause so will the Australians.

Technically, we should rule out all the Tri-Nations matches as tests, cause they played under the 4/12 interchange rule, when the international laws still have 'unlimited interchange' in there, something which surprisingly hasn't been update, but is still the case.

Where does it say that? Everyone knows int'l rules are played under 4/12 rule now. What's the point of arguing about technicalities? If someone in the RLIF has forgot to update the manual (there's a manual?!) well, I'm not surprised but it doesn't change the fact that Tests and the WC will be played under commonly accepted 4/12 rules.

Field sizes, well thats pretty straight forward they are affected by whats available. Say if USA was a test match, well good luck finding a much wider field in the USA. Even Union in the US, for matches they take to stadiums is played in a thinner than international standard field. To say move it to another ground which is wide enough generally in a lot of cases isn't practical, either economically, or some other reason/

RL has a minimum and a maximum when talking about field markings. If they're within those parameters there's no problem. Geoff Carr's bleatings were pathetic, but he should have been told about the thinner field out of courtesy.

20 minute breaks, they are allowed under international rules for extremes in weather, generally for extreme heat, but they can be taken also in extreme cold, if say Australia V GB needed that, which is quite possible if you play a Tri-Nations down under, especially when we just had a 40C day only yesterday, it would be suicide to prevent it cause it has not been used in past tests. When you have players health and even lives at risk, you have to leave gaps open for their safety. Thats where Razor's information about allowing 5 interchange is acctually correct, there are situations in the laws which do allow for 5 interchange, heat is one, safety is another, and generally if both sides agree to it.

Obviously safety must be the paramount concern, but Test regulations aren't necessaraily contravened by taking a water break. If the ref says 'alright lads, go have a drink' it's a lot different to having an extra player available.

If the WC is played in blazing sun in Oz will they have five subs? No way will they. It'll be 4/12. Unless they uniformly change the ruling.

Trust me this is an issue (uniform rules) which has been raised many, many many times, but it is a very big thing which would need a task force to do it, and quite frankly the RLIF, and other stakeholders have far more important things to spend their money on.

 

[Razor]

If the WC is played in blazing sun in Oz will they have five subs? No way will they. It'll be 4/12. Unless they uniformly change the ruling

4 subs/Unlimited interchanges unless the rules are changed. The international rules doesn't mention the 12 interchanges. That's an NRL rule. The international rule is unlimited interchanges and it won't be changed because the 3 countries that don't want unlimited interchange don't have the numbers to change it.

 

[griff]

4 subs/Unlimited interchanges unless the rules are changed. The international rules doesn't mention the 12 interchanges. That's an NRL rule. The international rule is unlimited interchanges and it won't be changed because the 3 countries that don't want unlimited interchange don't have the numbers to change it.

It doesn't say anything about unlimited interchange in the laws. It actually says teams are restricted to just 4 substitutions (ie once you are off you can't go back on). This is how internationals were played in the early 90s.

It does give scope for local use of different rules but specifically states that the above law applies to all matches involving teams from different countries.

By the letter of the law even 4/12 is illegal - but 4/12 is the best system and the international laws should be updated, and we should stick to them. 4/12 comes much closer to the spirit of the law than 5 subs.

 

[screeny]

I remember after an RLIF summit a few years ago the board accepted that 4/12 rule was being adopted by int'l footy. That's how all official matches are played.

Where's this int'l rules manual, by the way? I'd love to see it.......