Rules - which ones tick you off

[Berkeley_Eagle]

Following on from a topic on 2SM talkin sport today
Rules - which ones tick you off or that you really despise and if you could change any what would they be

Myself - I really hate the current rule for stripping the ball it has to many grey area's - probley one way to clarify this is, to give the power to the video ref to say to the ref "hey Steve that was stripped" as the video ref does get to see the incident in replay,

any others that come to mind ??

 

[CliffyIsGod]

Markers being straight, holding down the tackled player, and double-movement.

 

[bazza]

Stripping the ball.
I think it should be allowed - half the time the player drops the ball or holds it losely then his team gets a penalty when it is knocked out

 

[Berkeley_Eagle]

Stripping the ball.
I think it should be allowed - half the time the player drops the ball or holds it losely then his team gets a penalty when it is knocked out

wouldnt it just turn into a messy game then , with every tackle just about someone trying to strip the ball

 

[warren]

i hate the charge down . its a KNOCK ON!

 

[NPK]

wouldnt it just turn into a messy game then , with every tackle just about someone trying to strip the ball

Exactly.
I hate it when people blame ball carriers for poor ball security when someone thumps the ball out of their grasp - you try holding a ball while someone punches it!

 

[Frailty]

I hate the double movement rule... it needs to go back to the rule where a player can not advance the ball once the ball or the arm carrying the ball has hit the ground, or the tackle has been effected.

The charge down rule is great, makes the game interesting.

DOn't need Video Ref for strips, it will slow the game down too much, and i think the little bit of controversy adds interest in the game, and hey it gets everyone here talking doesn't it?

One thing I'm happy with this year is the Dominant and Surrender Tackle rulings, i think they are being very effective.

 

[ParraDude_Jay]

Double movement. One video ref thinks different to another, none agree. They need to go one way or the other and remove the momentum part of it. Either you can get up and go over, or you have to stay where you are momentum or no momentum.

Reni Maitua vs. Parramatta, he did exactly the same as Steve Simpson and his was allowed, yet Simpsons wasn't. The video refs have NFI and it needs to be sorted out.

 

[Billy the kid]

i hate the charge down . its a KNOCK ON!

I think that is the worst rule.

 

[Frailty]

Double movement. One video ref thinks different to another, none agree. They need to go one way or the other and remove the momentum part of it. Either you can get up and go over, or you have to stay where you are momentum or no momentum.

Reni Maitua vs. Parramatta, he did exactly the same as Steve Simpson and his was allowed, yet Simpsons wasn't. The video refs have NFI and it needs to be sorted out.

Not only that.. if you compare it to the warriors try against the sharks last week in perth, simpsons was much more clear cut a try than the supposed try to the warriors

 

[NPK]

I think that is the worst rule.

Dropkicks are knock-ons too.
Charge downs are deliberate plays at the ball, and should be called as such.

 

[McLovin]

If they take away the stripping rule then all you will see is 4 on 1 tackles with the opposition coming away with the ball most of the time. Keep the rule, its good.

The one i hate is the time limit on the kicks at goal. Why not just take time off right away???

 

[Jono078]

Double Movement - If you can reach, go for it.
Video Ref should be able to rule forward passes, or the ones that blatently look forward.
Flop Rule is just a confidence/spirit breaker.

 

[ParraDude_Jay]

Dropkicks are knock-ons too.
Charge downs are deliberate plays at the ball, and should be called as such.

Then halfbacks get as much time as they like when kicking the ball, hookers kicking out of dummy half have no pressure and you'll see 40:20's come so rapidly. Charging down is all about pressure on the kicker, and if the only way you can stop them kicking the ball is by charging down and having it called as a knock-on, then it's unfair.

 

[Frailty]

The problem arises when you decide what is blatantly forward.

Flop rule is good. Is a straight attempt at slowing the play the ball.

 

[weasel]

Hands down the stupidest rule is when tries are disallowed for an offside player whose not even involved in the play but is within ten metres of it.

 

[Iafeta]

Two things bug me

* Calling dominant, surrendor tackles on a player who's beaten a tackle already. What reward is there for breaking the line?
* The referees shouting "OUT" at scrum time when the ball is blatantly in the scrum.

 

[NPK]

Then halfbacks get as much time as they like when kicking the ball, hookers kicking out of dummy half have no pressure and you'll see 40:20's come so rapidly. Charging down is all about pressure on the kicker, and if the only way you can stop them kicking the ball is by charging down and having it called as a knock-on, then it's unfair.

Good point. How about this - if someone charges a kick down, and they regather, it's a scrum to the kicking team. But if the kicking team regathers, it's play on without a tackle restart. I just don't think it's fair that a player can play at the ball, knock on, and then pick up the ball to score.

 

[The_Coach]

2nd marker should have a hand on the 1st marker. If not your too far back and it's a penalty if you make a tackle. Too many markers stand about 5 meters back and are blantantly off-side yet the ref does nothing.

 

[NPK]

Hands down the stupidest rule is when tries are disallowed for an offside player whose not even involved in the play but is within ten metres of it.

The reason for that rule is that the offending player is close to the player who's fielding the kick, and puts unfair pressure on the kick retriever just by his presence. I think it's a fair rule, but has not been applied consistently.