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!

Rule tweaks incoming?

Trifili13

Juniors
Messages
1,226
Simple

HIA assessment sin bins last max 10 min

If the player is cleared to return, then sin binned player can also return

If he fails the HIA assessment then it reverts to a send off

HIA assessments need to be done in 10 minutes or it reverts to a 15 minute sin bin
Can see coaches rorting it as mentioned above. Player pretends he might be concussed from hit to head by key opposing player at crucial part of game when it barely touched him.

You start to go down tricky paths when you try and match a player going off from a team for injury or concussion caused by an opposition player by also removing the offender as it is open to rorting.

Maybe if a concussed player misses the following week then the opposition player also misses the following week so the team does not get an advantage in the game, but even that can be rorted depending on the following week's game that a certain result is required. Also as we know some players have had multiple concussions and missed multiple week's so can be somewhat unfare to have an offender also miss multiple games.

Maybe it's something that will always exist due to the contact nature of the game and officials just have to crack down on high shots and suspend players until they stop going high otherwise they pay the penalty.
 

siv

First Grade
Messages
6,776
Can see coaches rorting it as mentioned above. Player pretends he might be concussed from hit to head by key opposing player at crucial part of game when it barely touched him.

You start to go down tricky paths when you try and match a player going off from a team for injury or concussion caused by an opposition player by also removing the offender as it is open to rorting.

Maybe if a concussed player misses the following week then the opposition player also misses the following week so the team does not get an advantage in the game, but even that can be rorted depending on the following week's game that a certain result is required. Also as we know some players have had multiple concussions and missed multiple week's so can be somewhat unfare to have an offender also miss multiple games.

Maybe it's something that will always exist due to the contact nature of the game and officials just have to crack down on high shots and suspend players until they stop going high otherwise they pay the penalty.
If a player fails a HIA you have the mandatory 11 stand down

But it does fail the GF test
 

Saxon

Bench
Messages
3,205
It's so dumb. Either you play the ball or don't. Stand up and touch the ball with your foot. How hard is that to regulate?

Do they think the game will come to a standstill if players play the ball properly so they don't want that to happen?

.
NRL players generally have skill levels far higher than park footballers.

Now most of us here never played any higher than school or club footy, but if you are like me playing the ball with your foot was one of the first things your juniors coach drummed into you. Now if an unco 6 year old like me (I blossomed many years later into a beautiful swan o_O ) could do it, you'd have to think a professional who trains 5 days a week might be able to do better than 'a legitimate attempt'.
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
12,440
It's so dumb. Either you play the ball or don't. Stand up and touch the ball with your foot. How hard is that to regulate?

Do they think the game will come to a standstill if players play the ball properly so they don't want that to happen?

.

The truth of the matter is that's exactly what will happen
If players are required to get to their feet, play the ball correctly, with feet touching the ball, the game will be come to a standstill and become significantly less interesting

Genuine attempt to play the ball is a good distinction to make... as long as there is a genuine attempt, then we dont need the game bogged down in semantics and asking officials to determine if a stud scrapped the football or not.
 

Trifili13

Juniors
Messages
1,226
The truth of the matter is that's exactly what will happen
If players are required to get to their feet, play the ball correctly, with feet touching the ball, the game will be come to a standstill and become significantly less interesting

Genuine attempt to play the ball is a good distinction to make... as long as there is a genuine attempt, then we dont need the game bogged down in semantics and asking officials to determine if a stud scrapped the football or not.
Agree we don't want to get into semantics of whether a player's stud touched the ball. But then again you will have supporters complaining that the opposition didn't make a genuine attempt. Personally prefer player much touch the ball with the foot, less conjecture than was it a genuine attempt. It's not as if they have to worry about the ball being racked liked the old days if they put it down and play it properly.
 

siv

First Grade
Messages
6,776
Agree we don't want to get into semantics of whether a player's stud touched the ball. But then again you will have supporters complaining that the opposition didn't make a genuine attempt. Personally prefer player much touch the ball with the foot, less conjecture than was it a genuine attempt. It's not as if they have to worry about the ball being racked liked the old days if they put it down and play it properly.
Again

By making the player raise the ball 1m off the ground solves almost every play the ball problem that has crept into the game since striking for the ball was abolished
 

Latest posts

Top