Trainers on the field

[edabomb]

Link?

http://www.rlif.com/about/regulations_and_laws

I was going off 8.4 which reading more carefully only applies to in-goal.

 

[Vee]

http://www.rlif.com/about/regulations_and_laws

I was going off 8.4 which reading more carefully only applies to in-goal.

Yeah, at least you owned up to it. Still waiting for the lollipoping media and fans todo likewise. Or post the link, happy either way.

 

[RedVDave]

How else will the players know Walkers on? In all seriousness though it has to stop it's a bad look imo.

 

[edabomb]

Yeah, at least you owned up to it. Still waiting for the lollipoping media and fans todo likewise. Or post the link, happy either way.

I can't really find the rule that does apply to that scenario. I know it has been that way when it has hit the ref in the past - but the wording is very important as everywhere else in international rules refers to refs, touchies and spectators. A trainer is none of these things.

 

[Vee]

I can't really find the rule that does apply to that scenario. I know it has been that way when it has hit the ref in the past - but the wording is very important as everywhere else in international rules refers to refs, touchies and spectators. A trainer is none of these things.

My point exactly. The nrl asleep at the wheel after years of complaints about alf on the field in retirement playing more minutes than most players.

 

[WaznTheGreat]

Chris Waller didn't need to be on the field when Winx was playing,better trainer than these noobs

 

[Uncle Kraka]

I remember a cricket test match years ago where there was a wicket in the first or second over of the game. when the new batter was coming out, the bloke carrying the drinks was running out also. Umpires quickly gave him his marching orders and when asked about it after the days play they said there was absolutely no need for them to be out there so they were sent back. Same should apply in the nrl. If a player wants a drink they can wait till a try is scored or risk being a man down while they run to the sideline to grab a water bottle.

 

[MilkShark]

Annesley just said the attacking is the team with the greatest territory advantage.

 

[Pete Cash]

I think if the ball hits a teams trainer it should be a hand over/6 to go to the other side. Obviously this rule is for things like refs and @Tommy Smith running on the field to give boyd cordner a hug and not for things the teams can control like the f**king trainers they put there.

 

[edabomb]

Annesley just said the attacking is the team with the greatest territory advantage.

Yup has been that way as long as I remember.

 

[edabomb]

I think if the ball hits a teams trainer it should be a hand over/6 to go to the other side. Obviously this rule is for things like refs and @Tommy Smith running on the field to give boyd cordner a hug and not for things the teams can control like the f**king trainers they put there.

The trainer is more like a 14th man. Should be a penalty.

 

[Game_Breaker]

They should be banned from the field while the clock is ticking

What is their purpose?

 

[greenBV4]

Annesley just said the attacking is the team with the greatest territory advantage.

So if someone has the ball in there hands inside there own 50 and is running at a wall of people trying to stop you getting through, the person running forwards is defending?? and the people trying to stop them are attacking?

sure, that makes sense
(not saying your wrong, its just stupid that that is the rule)

 

[Pete Cash]

The trainer is more like a 14th man. Should be a penalty.

I was thinking penalty when i wrote it. Its certainly something i could go with. Even if there was no real advantage like say hodgson passes from dummy half and it hits a trainer parked out the back and we just pick up the ball and the ref ignores it. Its still messy and unnecessary for a trainer to be there in the first place.

Im not opposed to players getting drinks but in the 3rd minute wtf

 

[lockyno1]

They should be banned from the field while the clock is ticking

What is their purpose?

Exactly...if you are thirsty, you go to the touchline and get one...or you wait for a try!

 

[Mr Spock!]

I can't really find the rule that does apply to that scenario. I know it has been that way when it has hit the ref in the past - but the wording is very important as everywhere else in international rules refers to refs, touchies and spectators. A trainer is none of these things.

Yep, clearly a case of making it up as you go.

And is a stupid (non)rule.

 

[MilkShark]

So if someone has the ball in there hands inside there own 50 and is running at a wall of people trying to stop you getting through, the person running forwards is defending?? and the people trying to stop them are attacking?

sure, that makes sense
(not saying your wrong, its just stupid that that is the rule)

Yeah it’s bullshit.

 

[Mr Spock!]

So if someone has the ball in there hands inside there own 50 and is running at a wall of people trying to stop you getting through, the person running forwards is defending?? and the people trying to stop them are attacking?

sure, that makes sense
(not saying your wrong, its just stupid that that is the rule)

Yeah that's been in the rulebook for however long eg if the ball hits the ref, its a scrum with loose head and feed to the ATTACKING team ie the one attacking in that half of the field.

Trainers apparenlty aren't mentioned.

 

[skeepe]

So if someone has the ball in there hands inside there own 50 and is running at a wall of people trying to stop you getting through, the person running forwards is defending?? and the people trying to stop them are attacking?

sure, that makes sense
(not saying your wrong, its just stupid that that is the rule)

As ridiculous as it sounds, that’s correct.

 

[Mr Spock!]

Cant see the NRL doing it, what if someone is thirsty, outrageous.

You mean like my u10 and 11 year olds.

You wanna drink, go off.