Referees Making Up the Rules on the Spot Thread

[Vic Mackey]

That play you’ve used as an example... I thought the same thing initially and expected a penalty, but having seen it again they released him with momentum (for lack of a better term) and he kinda just stumbled the rest of the way out... could have been penalised but the play on call wasn’t that bad..

A better example from last night’s game was Manly getting (correctly) penalised for an obstruction/shepherd roughly in the centre of the field, yet an identical obstruction/shepherd in the NEXT SET OF SIX was deemed ok....

I dunno if it’s incompetence or bias or whatever, but it’s these sort of inconsistencies that infuriate me far more than poor interpretations.

If you get it a bit wrong, at the very least be consistent in your mistakes, rather than seemingly referee different teams with different rules...

*I guess when the guy running the game has openly stated “consistency is over rated as a measure of fairness”..... what hope have the referees got??

Huh? They marched him at least another 2-3ms after being called held.

The obstruction examples you’re using are ridiculous. The one that was a penalty made a 40m break. The one that wasn’t got tackled immediately. Do you not understand the term ‘advantage’

 

[KOMORI]

Huh? They marched him at least another 2-3ms after being called held.

The obstruction examples you’re using are ridiculous. The one that was a penalty made a 40m break. The one that wasn’t got tackled immediately. Do you not understand the term ‘advantage’

Still a shepherd, and the attacking player continued on with the play. Advantage or no, it means nothing in this situation.

The other play is neither here nor there.. I thought at the time it was a penalty: but it wasn’t, and the the other arguments have been resolved by other posters..

 

[Vic Mackey]

Still a shepherd, and the attacking player continued on with the play. Advantage or no, it means nothing in this situation.

The other play is neither here nor there.. I thought at the time it was a penalty: but it wasn’t, and the the other arguments have been resolved by other posters..

Well going off your interpretation they’re would be 30 penalties a game for obstruction

 

[KOMORI]

Well going off your interpretation they’re would be 30 penalties a game for obstruction

And the alternative is your interpretation, where “it’s cool no harm no foul”... if you’re going to penalise one side for a clear breach of the rules, you can’t not penalise the other team because they didn’t take any real advantage of said breach.

 

[simmo05]

And the alternative is your interpretation, where “it’s cool no harm no foul”... if you’re going to penalise one side for a clear breach of the rules, you can’t not penalise the other team because they didn’t take any real advantage of said breach.

No harm no foul, which is every shepard that does not lead to a video ref/kfc review

 

[Captain Apollo]

Man playing the ball can go into touch after the held call when getting to his feet to PTB. Belinda Sharp got it wrong earlier in the year.

Section 9 (Touch and Touch in Goal), Rule 1 of the Laws of the Game states the following -

The ball is in touch when it or a player in contact with it touches the touch line or the ground beyond the touchline or any object on or outside the touch line except when a player, tackled in the field of play, steps into touch as he regains his feet in which case he shall play-the-ball in the field of play.

Hope that helps for you all.

 

[HowHigh]

Wasn't this type of "rule" bought in because players were being penalised for moving off the mark or passing off the ground etc.. because they couldn't "hear" the officials call?

I thought so
Being penalized for that was a joke for a while instead of just making them go back and play the ball

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

I just hate that calling ‘held’ is not respected in any way by the defence. How many time do you hear ‘held held held’ the ball runner has stopped trying to fight and is trying to play the ball but the defence continues to drag him to the ground.

If the ball runner throws an offload it gets called back if the defence drives the player back a few metres it’s play on.

Another post that help with my argument that we should trial continuous live rucks similar or exactly like RU.

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

The NRL and the refs have absolutely lost the plot when it comes to aggressive physical contact. If this shit keeps up the enforcer role will basically be extinct.

I just love the irony of the NRL and the refs making such a huge song and dance about aggressive contact, especially around the head area, and yet Melbournes grubby wrestlemania tactics have been in the news all week and not a peep about the subject has leaked out of the NRL. Gee I wonder why that is.

 

[The Quest For Glory]

How about the Sivo try being disallowed because he shouldered an escort player out of the way who was never making an attempt for the ball?

 

[thorson1987]

Man playing the ball can go into touch after the held call when getting to his feet to PTB. Belinda Sharp got it wrong earlier in the year.

Was Kasey Badger.

And on her podcast she admitted she f**ked it up

 

[skeepe]

My favorite was a good legal hard hit, can't remember on who... Ceccin blows a penalty and when was rigtly asked what was wrong with the tackle, he came up with 'it was unnecessary'. Still looking for the 'unnecessary hard hit' tackle in the rule book.

He penalised Josh Hodgson for that when we played Manly a few years back

 

[Saxon]

Really? If the player playing the ball is holding he ball and touches the line he isnt out? I seem to remember a player getting to his feet and touching the line with his hand and he was out.

That happened to Addo-Carr earlier this year.
Definitely an incorrect ruling, as firechild said.

 

[Tiger5150]

That play you’ve used as an example... I thought the same thing initially and expected a penalty, but having seen it again they released him with momentum (for lack of a better term) and he kinda just stumbled the rest of the way out... could have been penalised but the play on call wasn’t that bad..

At the time that three Manly players grabbed Masters and dragged him 5 or 6 m after being called held 5 times then throw him over the sideline, then no penalty and just PTB, the penalty count was 7-1 Manly. It was at this point I knew we would be lucky to get another penalty.

 

[Tiger5150]

Still a shepherd, and the attacking player continued on with the play. Advantage or no, it means nothing in this situation.

The other play is neither here nor there.. I thought at the time it was a penalty: but it wasn’t, and the the other arguments have been resolved by other posters..

A player runs behind his team mate 5 or 6 times in EVERY game without being penalised. If no one is impeded and an advantage isnt gained, there is no penalty.

 

[Tiger5150]

Section 9 (Touch and Touch in Goal), Rule 1 of the Laws of the Game states the following -



Hope that helps for you all.

Interesting.....so when three guys throw you over the line and you are not "getting to your feet" do you pack a scrum or blow a penalty?

Making shit up as they go along.

 

[Tiger5150]

I thought so
Being penalized for that was a joke for a while instead of just making them go back and play the ball

I initially liked that new interpretation because yes it was ridiculous when a player didnt hear a call or such that it would be a penalty, but like EVERYTHING interpretive in the NRL it has been abused within an inch of its life and a plyer has to advance the make 5m before its pulled up now and PTB's are constantly progressing.

There is part of me that thinks that the answer to a lot of these grievances would be a zero tolerance call on things and let players and coaches adapt. It would be UGLY but would reverse most of what is bad about NRL right now.

 

[Tiger5150]

The NRL and the refs have absolutely lost the plot when it comes to aggressive physical contact. If this shit keeps up the enforcer role will basically be extinct.

And yet NRL pre-season marketing will be a montage of aggressive physical contact. The NRL does not know what it is. This is a direct result of having a CEO who has no principles and has made a career on bluff and bluster.

I just love the irony of the NRL and the refs making such a huge song and dance about aggressive contact, especially around the head area, and yet Melbournes grubby wrestlemania tactics have been in the news all week and not a peep about the subject has leaked out of the NRL. Gee I wonder why that is.

I think there are other conspiratorial forces at work. Melbourne have been disgusting grubs for 10 years and 4 weeks from the Finals News start flooding he media cycle with this?

 

[BadnMean]

I just hate that calling ‘held’ is not respected in any way by the defence. How many time do you hear ‘held held held’ the ball runner has stopped trying to fight and is trying to play the ball but the defence continues to drag him to the ground.

If the ball runner throws an offload it gets called back if the defence drives the player back a few metres it’s play on.

Yep. Properly repeating the call of held would go a long way to stopping the grapples & pushing off the mark etc. Ref calls held (cut all the calling names & release & move nonsense) and if he doesn't see the tacklers releasing, he blows it. If the attacker keeps moving off the mark after he's called held, the ref pulls him back to the mark & it slows his team down (penalty in itself without blowing one).

If you push him over after call of held- penalty. If you try to You just stop & start letting go, full stop.

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

And yet NRL pre-season marketing will be a montage of aggressive physical contact. The NRL does not know what it is. This is a direct result of having a CEO who has no principles and has made a career on bluff and bluster.

I think you might be closer to the money then you think with that one. Greenburg has made his entire life out of just exploiting his personal connections and winging it. Who looked at the state of the Bulldogs before he was appointed to the NRL and thought "yeah this guy knows what he's doing lets make him the boss."? And if it's a case of simply not having anyone better, than we're further up shit creek than even I thought.