The misconception that a player has to play the ball with their foot

[Zadar]

It's probably just me but discussion about this issue bores the tits off me.

As long as the ball rolls to the hooker who cares whether it was a leg or hand that got it there.

People call sport talk back radio like it's crucial to the game of Rugby League.

If you're calling a radio program to talk about that you have serious issues.

I agree, also, if the ball just travels a little bit forward from a pass I don't see an issue with it, as long as it isn't a mile forward.

 

[ed-grimley]

I think that there should be some onus on the defending player(s) to get off and let the ball be played - surely you can't be penalised for the way you play the ball if a defender is interfering with you.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Responsibilities of the player in possession
The tackled player shall:
a. ‘without delay regain his feet where he is tackled,
b. lift the ball clear of the ground,
c. face his opponent’s goal line
d. place the ball on the ground,
and make a genuine attempt to play the ball with the foot and maintain his balance. Section 11 (10) (b)

They only have to make an attempt rather than strictly touch their foot. Though just stepping over seems to count these days.

Where did you source that from OP?

I ask as this is what it specifically says in the Laws of the Game as available on the NRL's website -

Section 11 - The Tackle and Play-the-Ball


10. The play-the-ball shall operate as follows.

(a) The tackled player shall be immediately released and shall not be touched until the ball is in play.

(b) The tackled player shall without delay regain his feet where he was tackled, lift the ball clear of the ground, face his opponent’s goal line and place the ball on the ground in front of his foremost foot.

(c) One opponent may take up the position immediately opposite the tackled player.

(d) The tackled player may not play-the-ball before the players effecting the tackle have had time to clear the ruck.

(e) When the ball touches the ground it must be heeled (i.e. backwards) by the tackled player. The ball must not be kicked or heeled by the player marking him.
The ball is in play when it has been played backward.

(f) A player of each team, to be known as the acting halfback, may stand immediately and directly behind his own player taking part in the play-theball and must remain in this position, until the play-the-ball movement is complete.

(g) players of the side not in possession other than acting halfback are out of play if they fail to retire ten (10) metres* from the point at which the ball is played or to their own goal lines. Players of the side in possession other than the player taking part in the play-the-ball and the acting halfback must retire behind their players involved in the play-the-ball or to their own goal line.

(h) having retired the distance prescribed in the preceding paragraph no player of the team not in possession may advance until the ball has cleared the ruck. A player who is out of play may again take part in the game when the advantage gained by not retiring has been lost.

Sub-section (e) makes it explicitly clear the ball is to be heeled by the tackled player.

 

[LineBall]

I think that there should be some onus on the defending player(s) to get off and let the ball be played - surely you can't be penalised for the way you play the ball if a defender is interfering with you.

They already do this. We're focussing on how players, who aren't being interfered with, play the ball incorrectly.

 

[OldPanther]

Where did you source that from OP?

I ask as this is what it specifically says in the Laws of the Game as available on the NRL's website -



Sub-section (e) makes it explicitly clear the ball is to be heeled by the tackled player.

I've posted what I used in a comment. Mistake on my part. I didn't realise it was 2016 rules as opposed to 2017 and that they'd changed it as the way it's officiated hasn't.

 

[ed-grimley]

They already do this. We're focussing on how players, who aren't being interfered with, play the ball incorrectly.

Do they?

 

[thorson1987]

Fifita always gets pointed out as a culprit in this area (rightly), but JWH and the pillow Woodsy are equally as bad - they just don't milk for penalties as much.

NAS is just as bad as those two aswell.

 

[adamkungl]

If NRL play the balls shit people, you should see SL. It's touch footy stuff over there and no one gives a shit.

I suspect the difference is they never had the supposed wrestle era of defences really getting stuck into ruck management. Thus ruck speed has not been a major controversy in the game. So everyone just kind of shrugs and gets on with it.

Back in NRL-land we can't put the genie back in the bottle so to speak. Best we can do is simplify the rules and minimise the ability to 'cheat' the ruck from both sides. Get defenders out quickly and get attackers playing the ball properly.

 

[Foz]

Isn't there a rule about placing the ball in the middle of the scrum?
I think most people agree it's better just throwing the ball under the locks feet and get on with it.
I don't care how Fifita or Woods or anyone else play the ball.
As long as They get up and play it goal line to goal line play on.
That making an attempt to play the ball just makes a mockery of that rule.

What irks me is when the refs decide to penalise a player for not playing the ball correctly whilst just about everyone else on the field does the same thing.
Either penalise the lot of them or none at all.
Don't single out one player.

 

[ed-grimley]

If NRL play the balls shit people, you should see SL. It's touch footy stuff over there and no one gives a shit.

I suspect the difference is they never had the supposed wrestle era of defences really getting stuck into ruck management. Thus ruck speed has not been a major controversy in the game. So everyone just kind of shrugs and gets on with it.

Back in NRL-land we can't put the genie back in the bottle so to speak. Best we can do is simplify the rules and minimise the ability to 'cheat' the ruck from both sides. Get defenders out quickly and get attackers playing the ball properly.

Poms have always played the ball differently to us.

 

[adamkungl]

Isn't there a rule about placing the ball in the middle of the scrum?
I think most people agree it's better just throwing the ball under the locks feet and get on with it.
I don't care how Fifita or Woods or anyone else play the ball.
As long as They play it goal line to goal line play on.
That making an attempt to play the ball just makes a mockery of that rule.

What irks me is when the refs decide to penalise a player for not playing the ball correctly whilst just about everyone else on the field does the same thing.
Either penalise the lot of them or none at all.
Don't single out one player.

That's fine - if we change the rule book to say that a play-the-ball is just a roll ball.
The problem is drifting away from the rules with interpretations, and not penalising negative trends until some arbitrary crackdown 18 months after it becomes an issue, then the crackdown disappears before the finals coz no refs boss wants to face the media after his refs blew 19 play the ball penalties in a knockout semi.

 

[Foz]

That's fine - if we change the rule book to say that a play-the-ball is just a roll ball.
The problem is drifting away from the rules with interpretations, and not penalising negative trends until some arbitrary crackdown 18 months after it becomes an issue, then the crackdown disappears before the finals coz no refs boss wants to face the media after his refs blew 19 play the ball penalties in a knockout semi.

I think a roll ball like touch footy simplifies it.
Totally agree with what you say about the crackdowns which is why I think they should simplify the rules as much as possible.(In all areas of the game).
The other rules that irritate me is the player being within the 10 metres from a kick.
When is the player interfering with the play and when isn't he.
And the obstruction with the inside and outside of the shoulder rubbish.
I wish they'd just simplify the rule so it's black and white.
They believe it is.

 

[adamkungl]

The obstruction is a weird one where I think a black and white rule applied to a complex, moving situation actually harms it. I'd kind of just like the ref to judge whether a defender has been unfairly blocked from making a tackle. If he was never gonna make the tackle, then no. If he throws his hands up and flops on the ground, also no.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Just for the full record, following are some of the notes to the Law 10 of Section 11 from the Laws of the Game as cited in my previous post which pertain to this discussion -

Interfering with heel The tackler who is on the opponent’s side of the player should remove himself as quickly as possible so as not to interfere with the heel. If he does interfere he should be penalised.


Regain feet 10. (b) No part of the tackled player’s person other than his feet should be in contact with the ground when he releases the ball.


Not lifting the ball clear A tackled player, failing to lift the ball clear of the ground when regaining his feet, is to be penalised.


Accidental deflection 10. (e) When a tackled player attempts to play-the-ball backwards but accidentally deflects the ball forward, a scrum ensues with the non-offending team having the loose head and put-in.

 

[Captain Apollo]

In terms of scrums, they removed the requirement to put it in the "middle of the scrum" as it was put some time ago (the actual wording was the centre of the tunnel). This is what it now states in relation to feeding scrums -

Put-in or Feeding the Scrum (Section 12. The Scrum)

6. (a) The ball is to be fed into the tunnel from the Referee's side with the halfback standing square with both hands on the ball.

(b) The ball shall not be put in before the scrum has been correctly formed.

(c) There shall be no undue delay in putting the ball into the scrum.

(d) The player putting the ball in shall not hesitate or dummy and after putting it in he shall immediately retire behind his own pack of forwards.

 

[Hawkins]

could you bat the ball backwards with your wang? Might help ratings

 

[Foz]

In terms of scrums, they removed the requirement to put it in the "middle of the scrum" as it was put some time ago (the actual wording was the centre of the tunnel). This is what it now states in relation to feeding scrums -

Even putting the ball in the tunnels a stretch.
Which halfback doesn't put it behind their front rows feet?
Honestly I can live without scrums too though I don't mind a set move from them.

 

[Shorty]

I think scrums are a bit of a time waster and I've noticed things get promoted down the bottom of the screen or by the commentators when they happen.

 

[Scrooge McDuck]

Players are lucky today that the hooker can't hook and the marker can't strike. Weak dogs.

 

[umina panther]

The obstruction is a weird one where I think a black and white rule applied to a complex, moving situation actually harms it. I'd kind of just like the ref to judge whether a defender has been unfairly blocked from making a tackle. If he was never gonna make the tackle, then no. If he throws his hands up and flops on the ground, also no.

You want the current refs to make more decisions? f**k no