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!

NZ Shorten field again

carlnz

Bench
Messages
3,860
Australian officials have sought the intervention of the International Rugby League Federation over fears New Zealand plan to repeat last year's ploy of narrowing the playing field and reducing the in-goal for tomorrow night's second Tri-Nations Test at Ericsson Stadium.

ARL chief executive Geoff Carr said the Kangaroos would measure the dimensions of the ground when they trained there today after the Kiwis trimmed seven metres off the width of the field and cut the in-goals to a minimum six metres the last time the two countries met in Auckland.

Carr said the New Zealand officials had ignored requests to confirm the playing field would be the standard 68 metres wide and NZRL chairman Selwyn Pearson yesterday refused to comment when contacted by the Herald.

"This isn't a game run by the New Zealand Rugby League, it is run by the International Rugby League Federation and I believe there will be some communication [between them] overnight," Carr said.

"The Tri-Nations is managed by a sub-committee on behalf of the federation that consists of a representative of each nation and it will be up to the sub-committee to make a ruling and whatever the sub-committee says goes."
In the NRL, all grounds must be 68 metres wide but the Kiwis last year exploited a loophole in the international rules to provide flexibility for playing matches at venues with smaller playing areas, such as Loftus Road in London where Great Britain will host the Kiwis next week.

With international rules stating that the field must be a maximum of 68 metres wide but not specifying any minimum, the Kiwis dismissed Australia's complaints after the 16-16 draw at North Harbour Stadium by saying the pitch could have been the width of a cigarette paper.

"We're not playing in the NRL anymore and we will be working well within the international rules, that's all I will say at this stage," Pearson said.

"No one will know how wide it is until they get out there and measure it themselves. International rules say 68 metres maximum, and I think that's a lovely rule. Carlaw Park used to be 59 metres wide."

A spokesman for Ericsson Stadium, which is expected to host a sell-out crowd after New Zealand's 38-28 upset win in Sydney last Saturday night, said groundstaff were complying with instructions from the NZRL but declined to reveal what they were.

However, New Zealand television reported that the markings for the sideline on the eastern side of the ground appeared different to those from Warriors matches played at Ericsson Stadium this season and, with wet conditions forecast, there is a view that a more condensed game would suit the big Kiwis forwards.

Shorter in-goals would also hinder the kicking game of Australian halves Andrew Johns and Darren Lockyer.

"The international rule clearly states that the maximum field size is 100 metres by 68 metres but note four [of the rules] that Selwyn refuses to read for some reason or other says that in all adult games the field should be as close to the maximum as possible," Carr said.

"It is only written like that to allow games on fields that aren't big enough so the only real difference between the international rule and the NRL rule is that the NRL stipulates an in-goal area of eight metres and the international rule is between six metres and 11 metres.

"We've asked them to let us know what the in-goal is as well, out of courtesy and they haven't replied to that, either, so we will measure it up when we're there tomorrow for training but hopefully it can be resolved before then."

Australia prop Steve Price, who is the Warriors captain, said before the Kangaroos flew out of Sydney late yesterday that he had heard the Kiwis were planning to narrow the field.

"This is going to be just as tough, or if anything tougher than last week," Price said.



LONG AND SHORT OF IT


NRL GROUND DIMENSIONS



Field width: 68 metres (unless otherwise approved)

Length (goal line to goal line): 100 metres

In-goal areas: 8 metres (unless otherwise approved)

INTERNATIONAL DIMENSIONS

Field width:
68 metres (maximum)

Length: 100 metres (maximum)

In-goal areas: 6-11 metres
 

aussies1st

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
28,154
Going on last weeks form, I don't think it matters. We will just drop the ball in our own half so we won't even see the other half.
 

Humphrey

Juniors
Messages
952
I apologise Sel Pearson is a w*nker
Agree with Aussie1st and dont know why we'd bother in anycase.
 

Blake

Juniors
Messages
425
Haha, nice one. Kiwi's constantly get shafted when it comes to these games. Bout time they gave it back to the sanctimonious gits at the ARL.
 

SpaceMonkey

Immortal
Messages
39,454
Blake said:
Haha, nice one. Kiwi's constantly get shafted when it comes to these games. Bout time they gave it back to the sanctimonious gits at the ARL.

Yeah it's a little bit of a dirty trick but it's good to get our own back once in a while.
 

Blake

Juniors
Messages
425
It's within the rules. Call it - gamesmanship. What would you call the NRL suspending a player from their competition and having that suspension enforced upon the Intenational games?
 
Messages
4,975
This reminds me of what happened in State Of Origin with drawn games.


It happened once....the ARL got upset about it....but did bugger all to correct the rules.


Im not happy that the international game is able to be played with like this, but at the same time the ARL have no one to blame but themselves.
 

innsaneink

Referee
Messages
29,365
If the Kiwis and Selwyn Pearson wanna make emselves look like childish amateurs thats their business.

The fields the same for both teams, shortening the field will only curtail the quality of play if anything, just like a poor ten metres :clap::clap: well done Selwyn, but at the end of the day its the same for both teams ......but only one CEO is looking like a right royal prat.
 

carlnz

Bench
Messages
3,860
Well at the moment i have been told the pitch is

Dead Ball line is 8m,
Length is 100 metres, and
Width is just under 68 metres
 

Glen

Bench
Messages
3,958
Blake said:
It's within the rules. Call it - gamesmanship. What would you call the NRL suspending a player from their competition and having that suspension enforced upon the Intenational games?
What would you call Vagana and Pritchard dropping someone on their head and not even copping a one game suspension. The world is not against you guys, despite what you like to think
 

Jordan

Juniors
Messages
1,659
I wish QLD could do that in State of Origin.. they need to do something to nullify NSW's far superior backline.


If Australia lose this match, things could get interesting... If Australia loses one of the games against GB, then GB would only have to beat NZ once to make the final. In that position, would NZ- dare I say it- throw one of the matches against GB so that they would'nt face Australia in the final?
 

ozboy

Juniors
Messages
253
Another day in the competition known as International RL.

You never know what might be next, we might see a Greek or Maltese team actually contain some Greek and Maltese players one day.
 

mickdo

Coach
Messages
17,355
Blake said:
It's within the rules.

"The international rule clearly states that the maximum field size is 100 metres by 68 metres but note four [of the rules] that Selwyn refuses to read for some reason or other says that in all adult games the field should be as close to the maximum as possible" - Geoff Carr

Sounds like it isn't within the rules to me...
 

Manu Vatuvei

Coach
Messages
17,028
Jordan said:
I wish QLD could do that in State of Origin.. they need to do something to nullify NSW's far superior backline.


If Australia lose this match, things could get interesting... If Australia loses one of the games against GB, then GB would only have to beat NZ once to make the final. In that position, would NZ- dare I say it- throw one of the matches against GB so that they would'nt face Australia in the final?

It would be un-Australian of the Kiwis not to throw a match wherever possible. lol.
 

JK

Guest
Messages
5,549
Jordan said:
I wish QLD could do that in State of Origin.. they need to do something to nullify NSW's far superior backline.


If Australia lose this match, things could get interesting... If Australia loses one of the games against GB, then GB would only have to beat NZ once to make the final. In that position, would NZ- dare I say it- throw one of the matches against GB so that they would'nt face Australia in the final?

:clap: :clap:

That would be tops!
 

Jeffles

Bench
Messages
3,412
Australia have to win on the field. If they whinge about the dimensions they are taking away from the team's ability. If Geoff Carr wants to use Rule 4 (field should be maximum wherever possible) then the Kiwis could argue that they didn't have an 11m in goal last Saturday.

The long and short of it is this. Australia are a better side and should win regardless. If they lose, they shouldn't blame the field, they should blame themselves.

Go the Roos.
 

Blake

Juniors
Messages
425
mickdo said:
Sounds like it isn't within the rules to me...

You choose to quote a quote to entertain the thought something might not be within the rules of international league? Nice work.
 

Blake

Juniors
Messages
425
Jeffles said:
Australia have to win on the field. If they whinge about the dimensions they are taking away from the team's ability. If Geoff Carr wants to use Rule 4 (field should be maximum wherever possible) then the Kiwis could argue that they didn't have an 11m in goal last Saturday.

The long and short of it is this. Australia are a better side and should win regardless. If they lose, they shouldn't blame the field, they should blame themselves.

Go the Roos.

Clearly they have been better - last week they were not. Only as good as your last result - or something to that effect.
 

Blake

Juniors
Messages
425
Glen said:
What would you call Vagana and Pritchard dropping someone on their head and not even copping a one game suspension. The world is not against you guys, despite what you like to think

I would call it an error of judgement on behalf of those citing the wrong player. Should Vagana step up and ban himself because someone else was incompetent?

O yeah, suppose it is gamesmanship if he can take the field after dropping someone on their head - guarantee you 'whatshisname' will have a wee thought in the back of his head about how to go into a tackle this Friday.
 

Latest posts

Top