What's new
By:
Advanced search…
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!

If a player throws a ball deliberately into another player there will be a penalty

B

big hit!

Bench
Messages
3,452
T-Boon said:
The NFL changes its rules a lot more than the NRL and in really creative gutsy ways, but it does so in a pro active way.
They have an objective (lots of touch downs from passing plays because they are entertaining to the fans) and once the game even looks like being dominated by defense they adjust the rules. Currently they are likely to get rid of kick offs which is to do with safety but also they dont think it is very entertaining. \
I would love for the NFL to run Rugby League. I cannot even think of the last gutsy rule change the NRL made.
Click to expand...

Of course kick offs aren't entertaining.....they've moved the point of kick off further down the field so now all of them sail out of bounds beyond the end zone with less possibility of a return and potential concussion incidents. kick offs are where all the brutal blocks and hits were.

NFL clubs all offer their teams and players to media too, something that doesn't happen in the NRL, hence journos here need to go a dig up shit or uncover a scandal to get any news.
 
T-Boon

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,854
big hit! said:
Of course kick offs aren't entertaining.....they've moved the point of kick off further down the field so now all of them sail out of bounds beyond the end zone with less possibility of a return and potential concussion incidents. kick offs are where all the brutal blocks and hits were.

NFL clubs all offer their teams and players to media too, something that doesn't happen in the NRL, hence journos here need to go a dig up shit or uncover a scandal to get any news.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
We don't have the money that the NFL does to do research and the like obviously but what I dont get is why we don't copy off their blue print in every facet we can.
Everything they do we should be asking why cant that be applied to the NRL.
Example: they have concluded long ago that crowds increase when touch downs are increasing so they manipulate the rules so that passing offence always has a slight advantage. That finding would absolutely apply to NRL.
 
S

siv

First Grade
Messages
6,748
Wonder if Todd Greenburg has read read the rule book

Greg McCullum pointed out as follows the ruling

“Notes on the Laws of the Game.

“Penalise intentional interference 10.(g). If the ball is played quickly, all players will not necessarily have time to retire the prescribed distance.

“They should be penalised only if they intentionally interfere with play – either actively or passively.

“If the interference with play is accidental, a scrum should be formed. “
 
Card Shark

Card Shark

Immortal
Messages
32,237
no name said:
Don’t think it should be a penalty, just call play on if they deliberately do it.
That’s enough of a disadvantage.
Click to expand...

Good idea, that’s enough discouragement.

I even think this approach could be also somewhat adopted to the strip rule.

Often it’s dubious if it’s stripped or a loose carry (can be both) & the ref is guessing. A penalty 1 way or the other can be extremely harsh & game changing.

I wouldn’t mind the ref having the authority to say “50/50...pick it up & play it...still tackle 3”
 
TIGER14

TIGER14

Bench
Messages
2,604
SBD82 said:
...and the first time they implement this rule it's proven to be f**king ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Yep get rid of it.
Either that or make it a penalty only if the defending player is making a genuine attempt to get out of the way.
 
S

SBD82

Coach
Messages
17,849
TIGER14 said:
Yep get rid of it.
Either that or make it a penalty only if the defending player is making a genuine attempt to get out of the way.
Click to expand...
Yep.

If they continue to implement the rule the way they did tonight, players should just roll off either side of the ruck and kneel there like Jackson did. Means that the dummy half can't throw a pass.
 
Bring back John Fifita

Bring back John Fifita

First Grade
Messages
8,480
SBD82 said:
Yep.

If they continue to implement the rule the way they did tonight, players should just roll off either side of the ruck and kneel there like Jackson did. Means that the dummy half can't throw a pass.
Click to expand...
Agreed 100% - thought that exactly.

In effect, Jackson kneeling there has taken away a section of the field which McInnes could pass to - ie impeding him.

But that said I thought it was Dumb for McInnes to throw it and a blatant penalty.. If he ran at Jackson instead, impact - is that offside?
 
Exsilium

Exsilium

Coach
Messages
10,337
siv said:
Wonder if Todd Greenburg has read read the rule book

Greg McCullum pointed out as follows the ruling

“Notes on the Laws of the Game.

“Penalise intentional interference 10.(g). If the ball is played quickly, all players will not necessarily have time to retire the prescribed distance.

“They should be penalised only if they intentionally interfere with play – either actively or passively.

“If the interference with play is accidental, a scrum should be formed. “
Click to expand...

That has way too much common sense for the NRL to apply properly.

They’d need to add things like “but if like a player is just ‘there’ then blow a penalty, or not. You decide.”
 
myrrh ken

myrrh ken

First Grade
Messages
9,817
What the hell was jackson doing just kneeling there and what the hell was mcinnnes doing passing it into him. They both should have been given ten.
 
kdalymc

kdalymc

Bench
Messages
4,343
Surely there is a commonsense aspect that need to be added here, that Bulldogs bloke was doing absolutely nothing what are you meant to do....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top