It’s time to fix up the rugby league rules
Roar Guru Once again referees have dominated this weekend’s NRL games. The ambiguity around game day officiating is now at the point that any time a decision is sent upstairs it is becoming a bit of lottery as to the outcome.
I am as frustrated as anybody as to how all this rubbish has crept into our game. I also feel very sorry for the referees as the rules that they have to adjudicate to are a disgrace and are leading them into making poor choices during games.
If we want to see a return to games that are determined by the teams participating and not the man in the middle, than we need to reduce the ambiguity in the rules.
More black and white and less grey is what I am calling for here.
I have some suggestions that I wish to put to my fellow Roarers for adjudication. My focus is on two of the most controversial areas in our game at the moment.
These are rule changes that I believe will clear up a lot of the heated discussions, which seem to follow every game these days.
Rule 1: You have to have total possession when it the act of scoring a try. This means that the torso rule is abolished and control is refereed on the same basis as in the general field of play.
If a player has the ball stripped (i.e. Greg Inglis during Origin) in an attempt to score a try then by default this is a no try. If it is deemed an illegal discression than a penalty is awarded 10m out and play resumes.
This eliminates grey areas and refereeing interpretations and puts the onus back on the player to maintain possession at all times.
Rule 2: You cannot run behind your own player or obstruct a defending player at any point while maintaining possession of the football for the benefit of gaining your team an advantage.
With this rule if a player accidently runs behind their own player and submits (i.e. does not take advantage of this play) then play on.
If at any point a player with the football gets an advantage through either running behind a player or via a defensive team player being obstructed then it is no try and a penalty.
There should not be any need in this instance to take a view as to whether the shepherd or obstruction impeded the defensive team in any way.
This is grey area rubbish and should be eliminated from the rules. The onus should always be on the attacking team to execute their plays fairly and accurately.
Any hint of a defensive player not being given a fair chance to make a tackle should result in a no try.
These two rule changes in my opinion will remove a significant amount of controversy from our game.
I am getting very tired of rules committees introducing overly complicated rules that increase grey areas to our game and cause much frustration for the fans.
This is not rugby union. League prides itself on being a fast and simple game to both watch and play. Let us keep it that way.
The Crowd Says (6) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Greg Inglis, NRL, nrl referees, Rugby League
August 21st 2012 @ 6:29am
Matt said | August 21st 2012 @ 6:29am | Report comment
Official outcome:
- Melbourne try was incorrectly awarded
- Bulldogs try was incorrectly awarded.
Both teams went on to win by 1 point… whoops!
http://nrl.com.au/official-view-obstruction-rule-explained/tabid/10874/newsid/69382/default.aspx
August 21st 2012 @ 7:06am
steve b said | August 21st 2012 @ 7:06am | Report comment
Yes i think all players and fans would like to see these rules fixed asap ,,hands only in try scoring ,throw out the torso rule ,and a shepherd will always be a shepherd ,depending on what ref you get ,,so yes get rid of the grey area in this one ..and add the good tech get the refs on the same page ,and two or three in the video box one of which should be an x player .Will we see it happen ,,i suggest you don’t hold your breath ,although after the two shockers on the weekend maybe Harrigan has opened his eye’s and will get of his hands and do something ..
August 21st 2012 @ 8:30am
turbodewd said | August 21st 2012 @ 8:30am | Report comment
One rule i think is broken is how defenders are allowed to stand in front of the try line when defending it. That makes zero sense. Both feet should be behind the tryline. I am baffled as to why they are allowed to stand effectively a meter offside…AND YET right near the play the ball, if its that close, they have to be fully behind the line.
Utterly inconsistent!
August 21st 2012 @ 9:23am
Rob C said | August 21st 2012 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Did anyone see Thurston’s try last night… Another shocking decision in my opinion. Even the look on Thurstons face when he scored the try was enough to suggest that he thought he used is own player as a shield to get an advantage through the Dragons line of defense. Even under the ‘grey’ rules in place now I thought that was a clear no try…
Just goes to show it doesn’t matter how much you follow the game, every time a decision is sent upstairs its a 50-50 call whether you will get the right outcome. Time to simplify these rules I think…
August 21st 2012 @ 10:26am
Gareth said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:26am | Report comment
I’d like to see simulation taken to task. Ten minutes in the bin for anyone who bumps into a dummy runner and throws their arms up in the air, deliberately runs into the back of an opposing player while chasing a kick and sprawling, or stays down after a legal shot to try and win a penalty. Same goes for throwing yourself to the ground in the play of the ball after the tacklers have let go, holding a tackler’s jersey or arm so it looks like they’re not rolling away.
Personally, I don’t think there’s a problem with the obstruction rule. It seemed pretty black and white that the one in the Bulldogs game was a no try, and the responsibility rests on the video ref, not the rulebook.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:30am
Mantis said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:30am | Report comment
your points about possession of the ball and obstruction can be solved by common sense. If the video ref was allowed to use a little, there would be a number of rulings this year that would be reversed (G.I’s origin try etc…). I assume common sense for video refs is discouraged, and this leads to a number of perplexing decisions being made. A bit more common sense and a lot of these decisions would not be happening.
Rob – Re Thurstons try, after the Friday night games this had to be a try. I think it was less obvious then the dogs try on friday night, and i honestly dont think prior (or de belin, whoever it was), would have stopped him. It was milked more then anything.