The NRL rules are like any codified legal system. Although I don’t want to bore readers with a legal diatribe about what makes good law, some basic analysis of legal principles is vital to understand what is so wrong with the NRL Rules.
Fundamentally, there are three legal principles that highlight where the NRL rules fail dismally:
1). Publication of the laws.
2). Ability to challenge the enforcement of the laws.
3). Clarity of the laws.
Problem 1: Publication of the laws
Firstly, a common legal principle is that the laws should be known. You cannot follow laws that you are unaware of. As a rugby league fan that is angry with the constant barrage of bad refereeing decisions, I decided to read the rule book to make sure I understood the more contentious rules in the NRL.
Although the players may be given a good lesson in the rules, your average fan does not know the finer interpretational issues – despite what they slur in the stands after a few too many beers.
But there is a problem with finding the rules – it’s nearly impossible!
Maybe some of you have been given a copy of them for your refereeing course or maybe some of you are NRL insiders, but for your average NRL fan (club member!) that turns up each week to watch their team play, the rules are just a mythical and mysterious document that no-one has ever actually seen.
I looked on Google, NRL.com and a host of other forums and website related to the NRL. Everyone swears they have a PDF somewhere – but I still haven’t seen it and cannot find it.
Solution:
In this day and age, the NRL Rules 2012 should be made clearly available on NRL.com. The referee boss, when defending their referees against criticisms should be able to refer to the specific provision of the rule book that justifies the decision made.
Diehard fans should be able to have a copy of the rules sitting on their book shelf and able to pull it out whenever there is a moment like in Game 1 of Origin this year (Inglis’ dubious try).
Instead, we are given snippets of the rules and key changes to the rules. But give me a copy of the damn rule book…please!
Problem 2: Ability to challenge the enforcement of the laws
If you are charged with an offence in Australia, you afforded various legal rights to ensure you are not the victim of an injustice. These checks and balances are not perfect, but the concept is admirable. Not so with the application of the NRL rules. The players are faced with nothing short of a tyranny, with the NRL referees playing the role of a whistle blowing dictator.
The closest thing the players can do to challenge a ruling is to complain to the referee whilst on the run during the game.
There is no clear system for this process, with the referee deciding when he should hear a complaint and when he should dismiss a complaint. As a result, the referees are ridiculously inconsistent in their willingness to discuss their decisions with certain players.
A player like Cam Smith is sometimes able to engage in a 30 second discussion, whereas a stand in captain will often be told to go away like he is a whining 10-year-old child.
This actually affects the application of the rules. Some referee are easily swayed and a player like Cam Smith can occasionally influence the referee into giving his team slack in a certain area of the game
As for coaches, they are not allowed to say certain things at press conferences and if they do bring the integrity of the referee into question, they run the risk of being fined $10,000.
Fans – don’t even start… the best we can do is boo at the top of our lungs and feel as if occasionally, we might have pressured the ref to blow their whistle in our team’s favour!
Solution:
Bring in the challenge system. I know it has been said before but for some reason it is never trialled. Not even in a “trial” match!
The mechanics of a challenge system would be up for debate, but a basic system where each team are allowed three unsuccessful challenges to a decision a game. If your challenge is successful, you do not lose that challenge.
The challenge can only be used by the nominated captain of each team and can only be used when there is a stoppage in play (scrum, penalty, try or ball goes out).
It seems we are so concerned with not adopting the NFL style approach to refereeing, that we have failed to adopt this sensible policy. The reason this policy is sensible is that 9 times out of 10, when there is a bad call, the players on the spot know what the right call is and a challenge system would sort out theatrics and milking that goes on. It would also lessen the need to go to the video ref and, ironically, it would speed up the game.
It will happen, mark my words. The sooner we embrace the challenge system, the better!
Problem 3: Clarity of the laws
A good law is clear and easy to follow. There is no room for argument. You either broke it or you didn’t. The speed limit is a good example. If you are going 90km in an 80km zone, it may annoy you to get fined – but really, you broke the law and should pay the consequences.
The worst NRL rules are the ones where the application of the rule is unclear that the outcome is destined to be inconsistent. There are numerous examples of this (double movement, striping rule etc…) but one area of the laws of the game in desperate need for reform is forward pass rule.
With the flat pass now the attacking weapon of choice for many teams, this rule is being pushed to the limit and sadly, the rules of the game are useless.
I don’t have the actual wording of the forward pass rule (as it is not made easily available to use mere mortals – as discussed above), but the commentators have explained that as long as “the ball leaves the hand backwards, it is allowed to float forward”.
The rationale behind this law being brought into affect is clear enough and sensible at face value. There may be occasions where the momentum of the passing player or the wind means that a pass that left the players hands backwards, ends up drifting forwards to the receiver. On these occasions, the pass is deemed not be a forward pass.
Although the intention of this rule is clear, the application of the rule has proven extremely problematic. The application of the rule is actually so difficult that it has been deemed impossible for video referees to rule on a forward pass.
That in itself should show people what is wrong. If a video replay is unable to show if a pass went backwards, then what chance do our inept touch judges stand? If a rule is that hard to accurately enforce, then it is a dud rule and must be changed (regardless of the admirable intent).
Solution:
The rule should be simplified so that it can be challenged. Basically, the rule should be that the pass must be received behind where the passer of the ball released their pass.
Therefore, if an attacking player passes the ball on the 10m line and it is received by their team mate 9m out, then it is a forward pass as it has gone forward by a metre. Who cares if it was the wind, or momentum or the fairy godmother that made the ball travel forward.
A forward pass should be determined by inserting a digital line parallel to the try line. If the ball travels flat or backwards in relation to this line, then it is ok, if it drifts forward compared to that line – too bad, it is deemed a forward pass.
The players would simply react to this and make sure the receiver is not in front of where the ball was passed from. This would result in deeper play and perhaps less tries. But the rule would be a lot easier to enforce and would be challengeable. A clear law is a good law!
Summary:
I know the above thoughts will be bitterly opposed by many. But the problems of the NRL rules and their application are ruining the game. It is very likely a Grand Final will be decided by a poor refereeing decision.
We cannot expect perfection and there always be bad calls. But the best we can do is make sure we have a system of rules that is well known by all involved in the game, can be challenged on rare occasions by the players that are in a position to know what actually occurred and where the rules are able to be applied consistently.
John
Guest
Type rugby league laws of the game 2012 into google and the first search item reveals that PDF document your looking for.
Noel
Guest
Yes these are a real worry as there are probably half a dozen or so in every march , reason - referees are not in a position to make the call , and the TV camera is usually focused on the play the ball thus we all see it . Why are the referees not in a position to see the pass , because they are told to stay out of the area as they may interfere with the play . Touchjudges are called on to make the calls , not a job they should be doing .
Noel
Guest
I have read your piece on the laws of the game and agree that obtaining a copy is neigh on impossible,also that Harrigan and Co. have made the definition of many rules vague , to say the least . I don't agree that a challenge system would be an improvement as the final say would inevitably fall to the officials and this would ,more than likely see most challenges fail . With regards to the clarity you talk of,yes it would be better if we were all to be able to understand what it was that resulted in a stoppage in play,however the decision to act on a perceived breach is made by an official charged with the responsibility of making that decision and the fact that he differs in opinion to someone else does not make him wrong . When Bill Fallowfield rewrote the rule book in the early part of the 19th. centuary in it was stated the following - "The sole judge of matters of fact , on the field , shall be the referee" . And , in my opinmion we would be better off if that were still the case . Your point on forward passes is way off the mark , so far in fact that your suggestion is unworkable . Assume that a player can cover 100 Mtrs. in 15 seconds , and many are considerably faster . Now let's assume he throws a 12Mtr. pass and the ball takes 1.5 seconds to reach it's mark . The ball is travelling at the speed of the player carrying it when thrown , say the ball slows to half speed by the time it reaches its' mark during which time it has travelled some 4.9Mtrs forward of where it was aimed , no your digital line theory is just what is ,a bad idea and impractical . I could give many more examples however , if you cannot see what is wrong with your idea , they won't help you either .
Vodka jack
Guest
BTW Did des complain when the refs penalised the broncos heavily to get the Dogs back into the game last Sunday which is normal for the Sunday 3PM game...
johnb747b
Guest
I concur with the original article above. Anything that simplifies the rules in any footy code is welcome. A rule rarely if ever enforced is defending players standing outside the try line when the attacking side is close to their line. I assume that the rule still requires them to stand behind the try line.
Dogs Of War
Roar Guru
It took me 1 minute after I read your article to find it on nrl.com. It's not buried deep within the site or anything, and seems quite logical to be grouped with all the other elements around it. Not sure why the rules would have their own button on the site, given that most people couldn't be bothered ever reading them, and the other options they have are way more attractive/popular items for people to select. As for the Google search, it's really something you should point out to the NRL, they have a contact us button on the site (I am sure you can find that), I did the same searches for "Rules of AFL" and "Rules of NFL" and both first links were to the official rules of the game, on the official site, which the NRL search wasn't anywhere on the first page. Though I did like the concept of supplying them with all season memberships.
PuntPal
Roar Pro
Is that really very easy to find??? Why would it not have a link 'Rules of the Game', or a big tab...dont think its fair to say it is 'very easy to find'. I asked numerous of people to look and they couldnt find it either. What about the meta data on this link when you do google search? I could find anything on the net in under 1 min if it is well placed...the NRL rules arenot well placed. And yes I did look , I clearly said that in the article if you can read.
soapit
Guest
yes that crabbing sideways (or even moving backwards sometimes) happens often. hopefully soon the technology will develop soon to allow them to at least catch the definitely forward ones.
Matt
Guest
No you just need the winger to be 10m behind, how reasonable. I'm sure the gap will still be open by the time he runs up.
LT80
Roar Pro
The forward pass idea is terrible, and would make it virtually impossible to throw a long pass at speed without being deemed forward.
oikee
Guest
It is not just the rules, the whole game needs to either change or be left behind. This report has come from the business world. The National Rugby League has got to work out weather the game wants to keep being Amatuer or Professional. The game is a business, lets make that perfectly clear. At the moment it is amatuer. Look at the rules, look at the refs, even the TV screens, all amatuer. You also have to question the Salary Cap, it is keeping the game amatuer, so until this mess is looked at, the game will always be just a amatuer Sydney comp. If you run a business and bring through young people, train them up, spend time effort and money on these young future executives, only to have them stripped from you, that is not a business. And it never will be a business, i have never seen any business run in this manner.. The NRL, has to make a decision, do they want to stay amatuer, or do they want to become professional. At the moment, their are only 2 professional comps in Australia top 5-6 comps. Rugby union and Soccer. The AFL can never be while they have a draft. Yes it will even the game out as it needs to be, but they can never be seen as professional while they minipulate the game. As long as clubs like the Broncos and even the Storm and Warriors, as long as they can bring juniors through and have them taken away by other clubs without any reward, this game will continue to be amatuer, and nothing will convince me or the business world otherwise. Why spend the time effort on juniors to not see any reward, you might as well join the mob and just buy players and juniors from other clubs. The game will continue to be amatuer while the bigger city clubs are propping up the weaker Sydney teams. You will never get Brisbane Perth or New Zealand supporting Sydney clubs, so while these clubs continue to be weak and stripped of players and juniors at no cost, only expense in bringing the juniors through, time effort and money, people will continue to see through the code, see the amatuer side to the running of the game and leave enmass. The game going to the video ref to replay knock-on anfter knock-on is just a glimpse of the amatuer nature of the game. The torso rule is another, the forward pass, the obstruction rule, all flawed. Effort cant go without reward, at the moment it seems to me that buying players is a better option than bringing juniors through, and this became obvious once Lockyer retired. Clubs grow stronger stripping juniors from clubs while the Broncos will stay weak, and the game will stay Amatuer because less and less will support a amatuer comp. This not only applies to the Broncos, same could be said of Penrith Parra, even the Warriors. Probably Melbourne Storm and Perth if things dont change, it has to change, as i said, the game cant become professional under this salary cap guise, strong clubs with large juniors can never proper under this system. This system is designed to keep certain Sydney clubs strong, that is all, and the code will never grow outside this setup because people wont support this, i know i wont. Clive Palmer wont, Tony Sage wont. If these guys throw their support behind other codes, this amatuer code we call league only has itself to blame. It all comes down to this single argument, Does the Code Want to Stay Amatuer or become Professional. I have asked the question, i think others should do the same.
Curious
Guest
Dogs Of War, thanks, you quoted "Rules are very easy to find on the NRL website - Go to About->Reference Centre->Rules of the game" End quote, and they are BUT Sorry D.O.W. the correct search avenue is under "Laws of the Game" not Rules; and it's the latest, I guess, listed as OFFICIAL FEBRUARY 2012. The rest of us enjoy the read of the latest edition.
Lovey
Guest
Thanks, that is perfect. Commonsense says a flat pass is not forward if it does not end up ahead of where the thrower would have been if he maintained his motion. However it has occasionally seemed to me that the passer has been crabbing sideways when throwing a long pass which has ended up ahead. But I agree now, no need for a rule change. Leave it to the refs.
PLANKO
Guest
That game summed up Manly's season that year after winning the comp.... That season and every season I put it to you ROARERS that 6 points or 3 games that go your way is the difference between making the top 4 and strruggling to make the 8 that year was no different. Manly had a better for and against than teams in the TOP 4 that season. If extra games go you way all of a sudden you are in with a real chance... Look at the top 8 from 2010 Ladder2010 NRL season v ·t ·e Team Pld W D L B PF PA PD Pts 1 St. George Illawarra Dragons 24 17 0 7 2 518 299 +219 38 2 Penrith Panthers 24 15 0 9 2 645 489 +156 34 3 Wests Tigers 24 15 0 9 2 537 503 +34 34 4 Gold Coast Titans 24 15 0 9 2 520 498 +22 34 5 New Zealand Warriors 24 14 0 10 2 539 486 +53 32 6 Sydney Roosters 24 14 0 10 2 559 510 +49 32 7 Canberra Raiders 24 13 0 11 2 499 493 +6 30 8 Manly-Warringah Sea Eagles 24 12 0 12 2 545 510 +35 28 9 South Sydney Rabbitohs 24 11 0 13 2 584 567 +17 26 10 Brisbane Broncos 24 11 0 13 2 508 535 −27 26 11 Newcastle Knights 24 10 0 14 2 499 569 −70 24 12 Parramatta Eels 24 10 0 14 2 413 491 −78 24 13 Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs 24 9 0 15 2 494 539 −45 22 14 Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks 24 7 0 17 2 354 609 −255 18 15 North Queensland Cowboys 24 5 0 19 2 425 667 −242 14 16 Melbourne Storm 24 14 0 10 2 489 363 +126 01 Ps the STORM holding their rightful place.....
PuntPal
Roar Pro
Thanks Steve Yeah you have identified my main gripes as well - striping rule, getting back the 10.... All of these rules need to be designed with simplicty in mind. No grey areas, no interpretation based on so called 'common-sense' That was why I compared the NRL rules to the Legal system we live by. Imagine not knowing whether you were committing a crime or not...it would be impossible to function. That is how the players and coaches feel at the moment - they cant plan their strategy because one weeks something is being policed by the refs and so it is a penalty Even if the outcome of the rules is not what we want (i.e. I agree that our preferred forward pass rule would limit the ability for some long cut outs) that is the price we have to pay to have consistency.
PuntPal
Roar Pro
I am not so sure that requiring passes to not drift forward would mean cut out passes would go away from the game. The recieving player just needs to stand deeper and the thrower needs to factor in the drift forward. How many wingers no stand so flat compared to their centres. The Manly winger on Friday nigth ruined a try because he was so far in front of his centre. These guys are now compensating for the silly rule and expecting to catch is 1/2 metre in front of it where it was thrown. The fact that a ball spins and goes forward, or the wind catches longer balls, etc....all that in my opinion is just too bad - adjust your game. We need a rule for forward passes that can be enforced with more consistency and a POINT A to POINT B approach is the only rule I can see that achieves this
Mals
Roar Rookie
Only if you were a Parra supporter! lol
Matt
Guest
Quick tap, yep. The whole concept is the other team isn't ready. Duh referee. You can't hold up play just because the other team are walking around not paying attention and it's not "fair". The penalty has been given, they know they have to go back 10 and face up. Not hard.
Matt
Guest
No-one except physics. And reality. If you throw a ball backwards it doesn't matter where the player is, it's not like you gain any advantage. Yet another rule to try and enforce for no reason.
Chop
Guest
What a great game that was....I was there behind the goal posts at that end....