A double try or just double trouble?
Roar Guru
By Steve Kaless, 28 Dec 2009 Steve Kaless is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- double try, Indigenous All-Stars, Michael Searle, NRL, Rugby League, Wayne Bennett
Jeff Lima in action during the NRL, Round 19, Parramatta Eels v Melbourne Storm match at Parramatta Stadium in Sydney on Monday July 20, 2009. Eels won 18-16. AAP Image/Action Photographics, Robb Cox
A bright vision for the future or a nightmare wanting to be avoided at all costs? That is the question over the “Double Try” innovation which awaits rugby league at the inaugural NRL and Indigenous All-Stars match on the Gold Coast in February.
You’d be forgiven for thinking that someone has either been watching way too much NFL or has been trying too hard to justify a business trip to Hawaii, given the changes which will be used at the match in an effort to increase the game’s entertainment, and dare I say, novelty value.
The biggest innovation is the use of the “Double Try”. After each try, teams will have the choice of going for a conversion or having another tackle with which to score a further four points.
Your extra tackle will start on the 20 metre line in the centre of the field.
Wayne Bennett believes it could become part of the game within five years, but I’m not so sure.
Personally, I quite like conversions. It’s a skill and adds something to the game. It is also not like rugby league has a problem with too many shots at goal.
Conversely, rugby league may well have a problem of too many tries scored by kicks and this is what I can see the “Double Try” becoming. With the opposition defensive line set, I can see most sides just bombing it towards a wing.
The number of referees will double with two refereeing teams of two being used during the match.
It seems only five minutes ago we were all perfectly happy bagging out one referee and now we suddenly have four to choose from.
The coaches will also enter the limelight with coaches Bennett and Neil Henry having their quarter and three quarter time team speeches aired to the general public.
That should be genuinely interesting, but I wonder if they may have preferred a more animated coach than ‘Hollywood’ Bennett to boost the ratings.
Video referees will also explain their rulings to the commentators. Good luck if the panel includes Phil Gould.
Thankfully, sanity was restored before they took up Wendell Sailor’s offer to wear a microphone during the match.
I have got nothing against Wendell, but the last thing we need is to give sledging a bigger profile so every moron/comedian who trots onto a field thinks people want to hear their efforts to replicate Big Dell’s efforts.
Still the match, which is the brainchild of Gold Coast CEO Michael Searle, looks to be a great way to get the season off to a flying start.
I’m already looking forward to it, I might just have to adjust the volume.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby League articles
- Gallop and some of his precious Sydney NRL clubs must go (101)
- The NRL is back baby! (65)
- The NRL needs a vision (50)
- The NRL’s scariest players (50)
- Bulldogs setting benchmark for Sydney’s NRL clubs (46)
- Channel Nine needs NRL-cricket ODI compromise (35)
- NRL tackle count rule a surefire winner (33)
- Federal Court has it wrong on sports broadcast copyright (34)
- An open letter to Channel Nine (76)
- The NRL’s scariest players (56)
- Is the All Stars match increasing the divide? (24)
- Channel Nine needs NRL-cricket ODI compromise (35)
- The NRL needs a vision (52)
- New breed of NRL players continue to develop (24)
- Explore:
- double try, Indigenous All-Stars, Michael Searle, NRL, Rugby League, Wayne Bennett
M1tch said | December 28th 2009 @ 6:28am | Report comment
I like the idea, its good to see new rules being floated around and a chance for us (RL fans) to see them tested. The AFL has had their pre season comp to try new rules so its good for us to do something similar.
Down by 8 points with 20 seconds to go and you are still a chance to win the game..sounds good to me.
TammyS said | December 28th 2009 @ 6:38am | Report comment
Im not 100% sure but I believe with the double try rule, kicks are not allowed.
Not a fan of all the other changes.
I wish they’d just fix some of the stuff we already have in our game instead of introducing new things, eg. the scrums, either introduce a rule that makes it more competitive or get rid of them all together. I would’ve preferred to see that trialled in the game
Master Blaster said | December 28th 2009 @ 6:47am | Report comment
Dumb idea.
Can’t wait for the first time that a try takes forever to be sorted by the video referee, then the team goes for the 2nd try “conversion” option, scores what looks like a try, but it goes again to the video referee!
Back to back video referee decisions???
That scenario should have killed this stupid double-try idea before anyone left the meeting room.
Dogs Of War said | December 28th 2009 @ 7:05am | Report comment
This is what the Toyota Cup is for. Trial it in the lower grades, and get an idea of it’s worth. I am sure if their is value in it, it will be introduced.
Mick from Giralang said | December 28th 2009 @ 8:00am | Report comment
Apparently no kick is allowed on the double try play…it will make it rather easy to defend against, you’d think.
Dogs Of War said | December 28th 2009 @ 8:16am | Report comment
Set plays will again come to the fore. Remember some of the classic’s from the 80′s?
Mick from Giralang said | December 28th 2009 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Hope they bring back the ball-up-the-jumper trick.
katzilla said | December 28th 2009 @ 8:41am | Report comment
I don’t like it.
Theres already too much fluffing around after a try is scored.
I reckon they should make it 2 points for a try scored within 2 passes of a kick made within the 20 (So that if one of those lame tries from a cross field kick are scored they then can only get 2 points, worthwhile for some but not thrashed like some teams do)
2010 is the year of the dog
Dogs Of War said | December 28th 2009 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Thing is, that first game where a team is behind by 8 points, scores a try, and then elects to go for the 4 pointer and gets it to send the game into extra time will make it something awesome. It’s not like this will be used every time, just when teams need to catch up fast, and want to chance their arm.
rob said | December 28th 2009 @ 10:35am | Report comment
correct me if i’m wrong, but initially putting the ball down over the line, or a try, didn’t give you any points. it gave you an opportunity to “try” to kick a goal.
there seems to be some irony in now giving the option of not to have a “try” at kicking a goal.
if they did look at NFL for this rule, then maybe they could have used their scoring system a little more. a touchdown is worth 6 points. a normal conversion (a kick after the touchdown) is worth 1. you then have the “two point conversion” where they have to score a touchdown off 1 play to get the 2 points. if you’re going to try something mad, then maybe trying it with this scoring system would be best.
how about making tries scored under the posts worth 6 points and tries scored out wide less? or just blanket wide increase the points from a try to say 5 like rugby. then make then push in scrums.
Col the Bear said | December 28th 2009 @ 10:47am | Report comment
it just seems that NFL rules are slowly creeping into the game of RL each year with new rules being tried and coming in each year..when in the past the biggest change was going to 6 tacklles rule in the 60s and 3 points to 4 point tries in the 80s. 5 metre to 10 metre rule, place the ball in the second row for scrums instead of the tunnel..(where’s the contest in that).now it seems there is a rule change every year for the sake of change..
video refs.. 2 refs.etc etc. next will be you won’t have to ground the ball over the line as long as you cross it for a touchdown, sorry tri…
who knows with the NRL asking NFL for advice on the future, and with Gallop hosting the CEO of the NFL this seasons end.. maybe it is becoming a way of the future..and now with NFL on free to air, a lot more youth are able to watch it and get involved..ie (North West Predators)
the story last week in the North Shore times of a Norths SG Ball player,off to US samoa with 50 other aussie gridiron players to play against other gridiron teams there in a tournament maybe just a start of crosscoding..the AFL do it in the NFL..maybe the RL are looking at this also ..
Mushi said | December 29th 2009 @ 9:51am | Report comment
I think the video ref was in before the NFL, and even if not it is far more commonly used in the NRL with the NFL’s system more akin to tennis or cricket.
But it was funny to hear the red zone used for the first time in the NRL
Dogs Of War said | December 29th 2009 @ 10:11am | Report comment
No, it was taken from the NFL, but they got rid of the Video Ref for a brief period (5 years) due to some crap calls, then realised it was worse without video, but refined the rules so that it wasn’t used as much (Coach’s challenge).
Mushi said | December 29th 2009 @ 1:54pm | Report comment
If it was “taken” why is it so different?
Not disputing that’s the case more a question
Dogs Of War said | December 29th 2009 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
Like any rules or addition to games, you modify the idea so it suits the sport.
It wasn’t that long ago that many areas of the game where subject to video review, but the NRL had to stop that and make it only apply to tries.
We can’t go back to a game with a video review, and even the NFL knew that their game was better for it being in the game, though they had to remove it before the realisation came that sometimes you can only miss what you have had. People had forgotten how many stupid calls ref’s can make without the aid of the video to assist them.
Mushi said | December 30th 2009 @ 7:46am | Report comment
Agree, state of origin used to be the killer for me growing up, it felt like just about every game had an important 50/50 call and in close games that was the difference between winning and losing.
Rodney McDonell said | December 28th 2009 @ 10:48am | Report comment
*sigh* if your going to write an article, know what your writing about.
As the rule stipulates, you can not score in the double try period by kicking. That is, you can’t just bomb it to the wing, chip it and regather or thread it through for a fast outside back.
netrug said | December 28th 2009 @ 10:48am | Report comment
This method of scoring is already used in American football where instead of kicking for the extra point, an extra play may be used to score another touchdown to receive two points.
It is one of the original moves that is a hangover from the early days of Rugby which has remained in gridiron but removed from Rugby. It was called “running in”. As no points were awarded for scoring a try (which only means you get a try at goal), by running the ball in meant you could score closer to the posts and so make for an easier conversion attempt.
League must be trying to get back to the roots of the game, or as previously, just adapting something from America.
Master Blaster said | December 28th 2009 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
This is amazing!
I’ve been watching both rugby codes since the early 1990s and never seen this “running in” you speak of! So players run across the goal line with the ball and then try to get closer to the posts and ground the ball there? Wow!
Remarkable stuff there netrug (not!).
netrug said | December 29th 2009 @ 4:15pm | Report comment
Running in was removed from the game in the late 1800s.
Therefore Master Blaster, I suggest you look at the history of Rugby scoring throughout the ages. American football continued with the running in but changed the reason.
Another one is the field goal. It is different from a drop goal. The field goal was if the ball was loose on the ground, then you scored if you kicked it over the cross bar. This was removed as a scoring option in 1904 but the drop goal remained
Master Blaster said | December 29th 2009 @ 4:59pm | Report comment
You still had to touch the ball down on the ground to be awarded a try in rugby.
As for soccer goals in rugby, that is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard.
Show us all some linked sources.
netrug said | December 29th 2009 @ 6:52pm | Report comment
Of course you have to ground the ball for a try, and you had to when running the ball in.
Where were soccer goals mentinoned. Maybe I should have said over the cross bar and between the uprights. In years gone by there were goals (conversions), penalty goals, field goals, drop goals and goals from marks, all using Rugby posts but different values at different times. Goals were worth a point originally and up to seven but the try value did not count, field goals and drop goals were worth four points and penalty goals, three. Field goals were eliminated in 1904, goals from a matk in thw 1980s and the drop goal reduced to three in 1946. Also in the 1980s the try was five points and the conversion worth two.
Running in is mentioned in “Tom Browne’s Schooldays” and all values cf scoring methods can be seen by reading the Rugby Law books issued from 1845 onwards.