Why do refs need technology to see someone get belted? There are 4 of them ffs.
I understand your point though, and there's no right answer. I don't believe deliberate violent tackles are much of an issue in the game today, but it could be opened to exploitation.
Also, it's worth noting it's not just high tackles where this occurs. There have been countless instances this season of players dramatically flopping to the ground on their tryline after being lightly brushed by a decoy runner, to get a try looked at that they had no realstic hope of stopping.
Well said.
I get frustrated when violent acts take out a player in my team and not much happens in the game. I expect some players who stay down after being hit looking for a penalty feel some of the injustice that rewards future teams much more than the current one when there is foul play.
The answer to that is to properly penalise players for really bad tackles with appropriate suspensions. In some ways the NRL has already done this well with many of the worst acts of violence basically unseen in modern times. And it may still seem like rewarding future teams, but if suspensions were predictable and appropriate, most players would be careful to not infringe in the first place.
Maybe also allow sin bins for foul play. But still at the discretion of the on field referee, not from a bunker or video ref over rule. Then players would generally not use foul play (a lot has already been eliminated, shoulder charges disappeared over night, chicken wings and genuine crushers are very rare- we could do with a crack down on trips).
There is a lot of gamesmanship in NRL matches (and between them) but I do think we are softer on foul play than the Super League and it probably does encourage players to stay down in frustration. The Super League referees are (rightly in my opinion) often seen as superior to ours, but mostly it is because they are harsher on players, confident in their decision making (as they are scrutinised a lot less even when they make howlers, as they inevitably still do) and their decisions are backed up at the judiciary, and by league fans and journalists (more so than here).
I don't like seeing players miss games, it weakens our comp and viewing experience, and I'd never want a player like James Graham to have to "tone it down" too much to stay in the NRL. But a more consistent MRC, judiciary, and confident referees who penalise more often until players learn, would go a long way to eliminating most foul play and therefore eliminating the need to stay down. And in the long run I don't think we'd see too many more penalties or suspensions, players would learn to take care.
I hate penalties, but would much rather we stamp out high shots, even if we risk sometimes penalising a shot that isn't bad, than penalising "play the balls" or penalising teams for tackling around the ball before it is dropped/stripped.
