For those that care
-----------
The NRL referees' "pane of glass" has become the NRL players' pain in the arse. Thirteen years ago, referees were given an instructional video which said that if a ball crossed the dead-ball line, they should think of it as smashing through an imaginary pane of glass.
Therefore, if it broke the window via the actions of the kicker, it resulted in a 20-metre tap to the defending team. If the defenders forced it over the dead-ball line, it became a line drop-out.
It's a key difference, as was demonstrated on Friday night in the Broncos' win over the Panthers. The referee ruled Penrith should restart play with a line drop-out, following an in-goal grubber by Broncos fullback Darius Boyd, even though Penrith's Matt Moylan, with both feet on the ground, made contact with the ball only after it smashed the imaginary pane of glass. It's obvious referees have now abandoned this commonsense rule and decided that because the ball had not bounced on the ground after it crossed the dead-ball line, Moylan had denied the Broncos the miraculous opportunity of tapping the ball back and scoring a try.
This would explain why recently (and technically incorrectly) they allowed Kevin Naiqama's athletic dive across the dead-ball line to tap the ball back for the Wests Tigers fullback to score a brilliant try. Ditto Greg Inglis' knock-back of the ball to Mark Gasnier for a try to Australia at the SCG in 2008. We wouldn't want to deny these tries yet, technically, Naiqama and Inglis knocked the ball towards their opponent's dead-ball line.
Advertisement
Referees had an opportunity to rewrite the rule book in simple language when they introduced what was called the "Mick Potter" rule in response to the actions of fullbacks standing over the dead-ball line and reaching in to touch a ball that had been superbly grubber-kicked to stop within a metre of the line. So in came the "straddle rule" which says, "Should a kick be made dead by a defending player straddling the dead-ball line or touch in-goal line, play will restart with a goal line drop-out."
Moylan wasn't "straddling" the dead-ball line He didn't reach across the dead-ball line and pull the ball across. He had both feet on the ground. Maybe the referees are confused with the different laws regarding the ball crossing the touch line, compared to the dead-ball line. In the former, a ball in the air is not in touch until it hits the ground on or beyond the touch line as "The ball is in touch when it or a player in contact with it touches the touch line or the ground beyond the touch line".
In accordance with this, a 'Note' in the Section 9 of the rules explains "Jumping player knocks ball back", stating "The ball is not in touch if during flight it crosses the touch line but is knocked back by a player who is off the ground after jumping from the field of play."
Yet in regard to the dead-ball line there is no equivalent to the above rules. There was another incident on Friday night in the Tigers' loss to the Roosters which the lawmakers could rewrite if they don't want rugby league to resemble Australian rules. Referee Jared Maxwell denied Tigers centre Chris Lawrence a try, ruling a Roosters player caught the ball on the full in his own in-goal, even though Lawrence stripped the ball before the Roosters player's feet reached the ground.
The rule was introduced to reward defending players for their bravery in defusing a bomb, one of the few laws of the game biased to the defence. But the poorly worded section 8, 2 (c) rule does not reflect this. It states the ball is dead and a 20m tap is awarded when "a defending player, in his in-goal, takes a kick in general play from an opponent on the full." Note that "takes a kick" doesn't even mention the ball! Perhaps "NRL takes a kick in the behind!", if we want to use AFL language.
Under boss Dave Smith, the NRL has preached transparency, yet has abandoned the pane of glass rule! The current interpretations of the Laws by the present cadre of Referees/Assistant Referees/Touch Judges/Video Referees/Assistant Video Referees is the product of committee meetings. Determining correct rulings by consensus isn't necessarily conducive to good consistent decision-making. Players want certainty, not rules made of perspex, bending with the wind.
The rule explained
In order to reduce kicks in goal (and save themselves the agony of adjudicating who forced the ball dead), referees last year ruled that if an attacking kick went dead, the defending team would restart play with a 20-metre tap on zero tackle.
This is why Penrith coach Ivan Cleary blew up on Friday night after his team should have been awarded a tap. He said: "Ridiculous. And a massive, massive change in a very tight game. Instead of getting seven tackles, you get to defend your own line again."
One incentive of the rule change was to encourage teams to run the ball on the last tackle, rather than risk a kick over the dead-ball line. It has been successful.
Prozone reports there has been 40 tries in the first eight rounds from running the ball through the hands on the last tackle, compared to 30 for the same period last year. ​
Read more:
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ne-broncos-20150510-ggy85l.html#ixzz3lc1xnQjo
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook
