Responce from NRL RE:Declining of a conversion

[griffo346]

May 28 - The NRL has issued a statement about the right of teams to decline to attempt a conversion after scoring a try.
The statement - issued today - is as follows:

"The National Rugby League has today sought to end any doubt over the right of teams to decline a ‘conversion’, following yesterday’s match between the Tigers and the Panthers.

"Further reviews today confirm the official International Rule Book is ‘silent’ on the issue of whether a conversion must be taken. It is clear that if a conversion is attempted then that attempt cannot be by way of a ‘drop-goal’.

"Effective immediately, referees at Telstra Premiership level will adopt the interpretation that a team may decline a conversion attempt, but that it can do so only by way of the team captain approaching the referee and informing him of that decision.

"There will also be a submission made to the RLIF through the ARL that this process be adopted at an international rules level."


http://www.panthers.com.au/default.aspx?id=3&ArticleID=462

 

[wittyfan]

Hmmm. Isn't the true definition of a try is to "try" for a conversion?

 

[Brycey]

Hmmm. Isn't the true definition of a try is to "try" for a conversion?

Back in 1870, and the try wouldn't even count towards the scoring...just the conversion.

 

[wittyfan]

How times have changed!

 

[innsaneink]

I note there nothing re: refs blowing time off.

There needs to be consistency here too after trys been scored.

 

[Brycey]

Am I the only one that thinks when nothing is doing that time should be called off.

The instances being:

* From the time a try is scored until the kick off
* From the time a line droput is rewarded until the dropkick is taken

Or if it becomes a fkn issue, have timekeeping ala soccer.

 

[jc155776]

Call me ignorant but why is there talk about saying no to a conversion?>??

 

[brooksy19]

Panthers were trailing with 3 with 1 min to go, didn't want to waste 30 secs + taking the shot.

Still, it was a bit much for Maxwell to call time off.

 

[S.S.T.I.D]

Am I the only one that thinks when nothing is doing that time should be called off.

The instances being:

* From the time a try is scored until the kick off
* From the time a line droput is rewarded until the dropkick is taken

Or if it becomes a fkn issue, have timekeeping ala soccer.

You certainly aren't. In my opinion the clock should be stopped for any stoppage in play.

 

[TITAN1]

Panthers were trailing with 3 with 1 min to go, didn't want to waste 30 secs + taking the shot.

Still, it was a bit much for Maxwell to call time off.

Probably something to do with a tigers player loitering around the conversion.
This late ruling doesnt help penriff..hope the ref isnt a local!

 

[bartman]

Teams have exercised the right not to convert in the past. If it isn't clear in the rules, then it should be made so.

Re the time out. I think it's sensible to call time out following any (claim for a) try, until the next kick-off. That means things like video ref, conversions, walking/running back to the halfway etc will be consistent and never have any impact on the game clock.

Referees should retain also that kicking clock/limit they had a few years back, so that kicks are taken in 90 seconds after the kicker places the tee, or the kick at goal forfeited.

 

[hybrid_tiger]

Penrith had no chance of winning anyway and yes, the clock shouldn't have been stopped.

Either stop the clock for every conversion, or none at all.

 

[RL1908]

I'm sure that the idea of calling time-off between the try and the subsequent kick-off was trialed in the early 1980s in a Manly game - it was never used again after Manly scored 6 or so tries and the game took almost two hours (Graham Eadie was not the quickest goal kicker).

Imagine what score the Broncos would have put on the Knights last Sunday if the game had gone another 10 or 15 minutes.

I think the NRL (and perhaps only in the NRL) the clock should be automatically stopped after tries are scored, but only in the final five minutes of the game.

I accept that it is different to the other 75 minutes of the game, but I think some standard rule has to be applied (the current haphazard time management by referees is too inconsistent), and having it for the full 80 minutes will make games too long (as if video refs aren't making games long enough as it is).

 

[*Paul*]

I'm sure that the idea of calling time-off between the try and the subsequent kick-off was trialed in the early 1980s in a Manly game

It was 1983's early rounds - not only was it hot, but Parramatta beat Newtown 54-14, a game total of 12 tries. IIRC, they were on the field for over 100 minutes.

 

[Tom Shines]

Teams have exercised the right not to convert in the past. If it isn't clear in the rules, then it should be made so.

Re the time out. I think it's sensible to call time out following any (claim for a) try, until the next kick-off. That means things like video ref, conversions, walking/running back to the halfway etc will be consistent and never have any impact on the game clock.

Referees should retain also that kicking clock/limit they had a few years back, so that kicks are taken in 90 seconds after the kicker places the tee, or the kick at goal forfeited.

There was no time-out though — there was just a $2000 fine. :roll:
Should be sixty seconds from tee placement to kick. And a hooter should go off like a basketball shot clock.

 

[tiger_nick]

this whole thing really sh*tted me. penrith scored with approx 40 secs to go. even if they declined the conversion the ref wold have had to have kept time ticking, so by the time the tigers got back to halfway to kick off the siren probably would have gone anyway. penrith would have got AT MOST one play, probably from their try line. but if the ref was fair dinkim and consistant, the tigers wouldnt have been allowed to kick off anyway.
​

 

[RL1908]

There was no time-out though — there was just a $2000 fine. :roll:
Should be sixty seconds from tee placement to kick. And a hooter should go off like a basketball shot clock.

Top idea! What has escaped attention since Sunday is how quickly that final conversion was taken once was the ball was on the tee - and that he nailed it from the touchline despite taking barely a few seconds to ready himself.

The shot clock should also be used for:
1. Drop outs - give the team 60 seconds or be penalised.
2. Video referees!

 

[***MH***]

Jared Maxwell can be forgiven in his current interpretation of the law.

On page 14 of the Laws of the Game, Section 6, Law 8 under Notes;
it states, "A Referee should ensure that a kick at goal is taken from the correct position by advising the kicker beforehand. If the Referee’s advice is ignored by the kicker no goal shall be
allowed and the kick shall not be retaken."
"If a player wastes time when kicking at goal, the Referee may caution him or, in an extreme case, dismiss him. He should
not cancel the kick but should allow extra time to compensate
for time lost."

In the above law, "A referee should ensure a kick at goal is taken...." and "He should
not cancel the kick...." enforces Jared's decision.

So to say that the rules state otherwise is not totally correct, the rules need further clarification with the powers that be.

If the Panthers just took the attempt instead of wasting their time disputing the decision of the referee, they would not have put themselves into that position.

 

[forward pass]

I remember a State of Origin match once where Qld declined the conversion to have another shot at a try. I didn't think it was a problem.

With regards to time off for kicks - This did happen many years ago. I can't remember when but the clock was stopped whenever the ball was dead. The problem was that matches were finishing in the dark (Sunday arvo games here) so they changed it as matches were going on too long.

I personally wouldn't mind as I think games are over too quickly anyway !

 

[Utey]

Shot clock is the only way.