My word this is becoming tiresome. The meeting of the NRL Competition Committee yesterday opened the window even further into how slow-moving and oblivious these characters can be.
Many believe the NRL product is good enough to withstand the challenge of rival sports (or, in coming years, the legal system).
Then again people still smoke, smash asbestos without a mask and listen to talkback radio.
Surely if there’s no immediate effect there can be no harm? Who wants to think about the future? That seems to be the NRL’s approach.
It’s difficult to describe management of the NRL as having descended into chaos, because while chaos implies some sort of disorder, disorganisation and confusion, it also implies a hectic commotion.
The Competition Committee don’t seem to have the energy, inspiration or wisdom to create even the modicum of mayhem that would deserve the epithet ‘chaos’.
This is a cause for great concern, and can only hope that David Smith’s new management structure puts an end to type of drivel served up yesterday.
Consider for a moment that the key issues discussed were send-offs, sin bins and time-wasting.
Leaving aside that the Dr solved this before the season even began, it is somewhat of a concern that they are approaching them with a sense of surprise.
One of the most important decisions a referee can make – the send-off – doesn’t seem to have been ‘workshopped’ in any pre-season – ever – which begs the question why?
And the greatest issue in the game right now – player welfare – also appears beyond the Committee’s grasp. They are clearly both related.
NRL.com reports that referees have now ‘been told’ to be more aware of the send-off option, as if it was only discovered overnight.
Presumably, this is what Nathan McGuirk meant when he described the meeting as insightful. What – rehashing stuff that should’ve been sorted years ago? It’s like a People’s Front of Judea meeting!
Some poor sod is probably going to get sent off imminently for a completely undeserving reason.
As always with NRL referees, it is double-up to catch up, meaning you should probably never let them near your self-managed super.
But as soon as Richie Fa’aoso obliges, making the decision an easy one for them, they go to water and slip behind Josh Dragon in the race for the game’s best decision-maker.
They simply do not appear to have a framework or strategy for dealing with the game’s rules or issues.
To suggest now, as NRL.com does, that a player could now face dismissal for a shoulder charge should it be deemed serious enough is a sick and disappointing joke.
The NRL had the chance when Fa’aoso first sent Ash Harrison on a one-way ticket to Disneyland.
The spear tackle issue should have been clear. At least a yellow card and 10 minutes in the sin bin for the first spear tackle, and a second yellow (ie. Red and sent off) for the next one.
If the first was bad enough, it’s a straight red card. It’s really quite simple, yet the great announcement yesterday was that foul play is exempt from the sin bin. Breathtaking.
Though it’s not as absurd as Brad Fittler’s insinuation, along with Geoff Toovey, that Inglis was somehow implicated in spearing himself.
So, not only was Inglis the man on the grassy knoll, he likes to up-end himself and to bury his face in it as well, Gai Waterhouse-style.
These comments are the antithesis of the Jamie Soward principle – in order to comment on any aspect of rugby league, commentators need to have played NRL with at least the equivalent honours bestowed upon him.
Given the evidence at hand, perhaps the opposite is the case.
The other great leap forward was investigating time-wasting surrounding scrums. Eight minutes is being wasted, no less!
But why restrict it to scrums?
I mean, why should a referee makes different decisions based on the same circumstances just because it’s the 75th minute in a close game, and not the fifth minute? We shouldn’t.
As above, the NRL requires a framework. They need to start by asking what time-off is designed to do (other than related to injury)?
The answer: to avoid wasting time.
Time-offs should occur whenever the ball crosses the sidelines, or dead ball lines, resuming with the scrum or drop-out.
Time-offs should begin after each try and last until play resumes with the kick-off (meaning the goal is kicked in time-off).
Scrums related to knock-ons chew up far less time because the players are already assembled. Besides, the referees can blow time-off once either pack has bound.
Why do they try to recreate the wheel and end up with a rock?
Von Neumann
Roar Guru
Let me gather them..... hahaha
Australian Rules
Guest
hmmm...I wonder what Von Neumann's thoughts on this are? ;)
Von Neumann
Roar Guru
I hope this comment goes through, because its important. You say its tiresome, and I agree! So where does this system benefit everyone? It will go a long way to cleaning up the game by remove undesired elements from it. Everyone will know what to expect and know what is coming to them. For years there has been furore over the chicken wing tackles, players falling over deliberately in tackles, new grappling techniques, unfair slowing down of the play the ball, twisting and bad-spirited wrestling tactics, ect, ect, ect, and its clearly in bad spirits and no one likes it when for 10 mins a side has been playing especially dirty....but a penalty is too much perhaps, and the ref tries to even the game up or whatever where he can....and then a coach goes off and complains about the penalty count and he questions the refs and the public consider it and some lose faith. Well he would have reason to quibble on some grounds but its never a good look. For starters can you imagine ricky stuart getting upset with the refs when his side copped 7 blue cards for reasons clearly stated and he knows when, why and how they came about? The blue cards in of themselves have not affected his side because he has not received many penalties from them perhaps. They can be seen as fair because they deliver the right amount of 'penalty' and he would know if his players kept that kind of stuff up he would see his side copping penalties. I can see fa`oso changing his style when he knows that not only is he risking being on report for a spear tackle (its no coincidence he was involved in many of those spears), but he is also building a tally of infringements for undesirably play that will affect his season if he does not pull it up. He is also risking loss of income (small amount, maybe 1000 dollars). I still want players to compete but I want them to be under the whip of keeping the game fair, safe and balanced. By spreading out the punishment on various levels, it will give players a chance to adjust. It will also give teams a chance to adjust week by week without affecting their finals hopes so much. How can a coach blow up if he knows his team is accountable and where they are accountable AND he may not have his team severely punished in this weeks matches, but he knows if he continues that style he may suffer next week. I think it will be a fairer system, both flexible and hard, but not too hard -- and I think it will promote long-term clean play while removing the reasons for coaches to blow up and question the refs. I know there is a 10,000 dollar fine, ect, but I am trying to give a pressure-release valve to the situation as well without letting anyone get off scott-free. This will also provide refs with the tools to have positive influences on the game more than ever and reduce the pressure on the judiciary. I think long term it will put everyone on notice in a meaningful and constructive way. And I hope it will stop people from seeing the whole process as tiresome, because justice will be done incrementally at the time of the offences without making teams suffer too much in the heat of battle. I see it as a warning system with known consequences and adding a further fine-tuned setting for penalizing players. Ultimately the blue, yellow and red card system can be used anyway the ARLC see fit, irregardless of my interpretation of it - its the system thats the strength and focus, not the calls themselves, which will always have to be decided on game-day and not from the keyboard. After some amount of time I think the system can evolve and adjust to something that suits the games modern needs better. And I hope to eliminate everyones feelings of "the adjudication system is tiresome and floppy at times". To be honest, the mid week when I hear of suspensions, ect is my least favorite part of the game, as are the calls for putting people on report. I think we can bite at the issue from both sides and make it better.
Von Neumann
Roar Guru
Clarity for the genesis of my thoughts: So I really basically just consider the policing pretty good (because each year there is some dodgy new technique out to try and fool the rules along with one or two old bugbears) and the limitation being the system used to police it. Whether ANY of this works in practice to the level i want it to work (96+%, real figure for error and public,coach and player satisfaction in my mind) is anyones guess. Maybe I tweaked it wrong in my mind. Maybe people will say its more unfair and that a blue card from february has made some guy suffer in september and its not right.... oh, see, running the simulation in my mind, in the players shoes.....I *did* say later semi finals are not included in most of those cards (so a suspension can not be handed out to later semi's matches - I want players dettered and punished during the regular season for regular season matches and one or two finals -- not a teams year destroyed because of something that happened at the start of the year) which is fair enough, I don't want some minor infringement to have a bearing on the grand final. But I guess that level is protected somewhat via blue cards simply adding to make up yellow cards. -----I also want fines introduced. Suspensions are not enough. The money can be rewarded back for good behavior. I still think that its a simple progression and system to follow though, and I think it will bring about clarity. I have not made the system span across Origin and Tests into clubs and vice versa. I think tactics in one game your coach gave you should not weight you in another arena. But I do believe in send offs for Origin and tests. And I love the idea of throwing up a blue card (or object) with a LED light on it. I want the decisions to be visible and audible and the system easily followed through its progression. I also want consequences for all actions to be felt by the audience and considered fair in their being awarded and the progression. I do not like the rubbery nature of peoples opinions, so in a blue card system there is some flexibility, but you GOT TO ADMIT -- if you get 5 blue cards, you deserve a yellow. Of that, there would be no question.
Von Neumann
Roar Guru
should not be too harsh on them. its no good changing things willy nilly on whims. I still like the article, these are the issues we need to talk about, and I am sure they will be addressed in time. **** Summary, for now it suffices, but there is room for improvement, lets not be too harsh -- and I have included some little things I think would go a long way to making it better. A restructure of sorts. And I think we have the rational minds in the game now who can nut this out, and when they get a moment, enact on it. **** __ I think that the administration has the ability now to reasonably discuss and implement new things. We must know that they seem to have a lot on their plate and the new CEO just moved in. The rules suffice for now, but it can be better. I dont have a major problem with the rules, just how some commentators go off about them -- like the obstruction disallowed try on Friday night.....i can see why the ref didn't award the try, the commentator could not and was being harsh and deliberately dramatic. Tho he is usually much better lately. :: I think there can sometimes be confusion in rulings that occurs too often. And one can lose faith a little - or question the refs a bit too much.... My solution for this would be to have the ref give his reason to the audience. We have the technology for this. It can happen at the time or within a couple of minutes, but we can't leave confused minds or people to simmer. Given the game is so flowing, it may be that the explanation can come over his microphone and/or via the video ref. Things such as spear tackles I can see its not cut and dry and sometimes a player being tackled will lean forward, ala inglish and help out the spear. Its no use going to an extreme length on the offender, as this day and age with so much riding on results (for more than just players) send offs should not be given lightly, and we need to protect balance as much as possible while still providing significant deterrents. I do believe in time offs. we could potentially have an extra 5 mins of footy and that is only a good thing for all involved. That, or for added time with the ref to either call for X amount of tackles to happen after his call or for him to say after X turnovers. whatever works best. The thing with send offs is, and the media dont help the perception, is that it alters the game irrevocably. Better to put them on report. And in that way start each new game with a known theoretical strength. There is too much riding on these results now. BUT in saying that I would like some kind of clear limit the refs adhered to. For instance, 3 spear tackles from one player may be deemed bad enough for a send off (idea only), or such as an unprofessional situation outside the bounds of the game on field, judged by the refs (all of them) personal value standards of what we expect in the modern game. ___ To that end, I think a card system needs to be introduced. One different from soccer. I think we need blue cards and yellow cards (at least) and red cards (maybe), bearing in mind unlike soccer and union, removing one player is a bridge way to far for most sides in rugby league since you can't defend your goal line at the best of times exceptionally well. In soccer, you can move players around a bit (get rid of second striker for defender, ect, and in Union 14 players is not so hard to play with compared to in league when you have 12).... - So anyway, cards accumulate throughout matches and across the season (but don't cross between competitions like Origins and Tests for most offences, and later-stage semi's - I can provide you with my reasoning). - You could set it at 5 blue cards equal 1 yellow card, and depending on whether you are using red cards (automatic suspension along with of judiciary who can extend it), make it that 2 or 3 yellow cards equal a red. And IF you don't have send offs the suspension will start from the next match. I think this whole thing will bring about more standardization which is what I think is missing - or the perception of it. -- the only other thing to suggest is a 5 minute sin bin being used more frequently. But this may run against the idea of no send-offs. I certainly think we need a blue and yellow card system. To elaborate: blue used for tardiness and players continual wavering from the referees instructions, bad or repeated penalties which are disrupting the game too much, and yellow for more serious matters. - Time wasting to be eliminated. Stop the clock. - I'm happy with how the game is being policed, I just think a system like I mentioned comes out as more fair and people can see clearly where a playing is infringing badly, so when a yellow card comes around there are no qualms. I also think it will give players a chance to lift their standards over time and cut out a lot of the nonsense. - You don't need to stop the game to deliver a blue card, just do what they do in American Football and throw the card in the air, put a blue LED light on it so people can see it. - I would also like to see the refs being hooked up to the speakers at the grounds so the crowd can hear the calls and the reasons. - I would like to see the "control room" video refs implemented and a captains challenge on a limited range of calls.
Dr NRL
Roar Rookie
Exaclty Turbo. We shouldn't even need to talk about time wasting. It shouldn't be an issue.
Dogs Of War
Roar Guru
Or even just reduce the offending teams interchange count by 1. If you run out of interchanges, it's 10 mins in the bin. Same result really, I don't like the ability to chose a player not to take any further part, especially if they weren't the offender.
turbodewd
Roar Guru
Under current rules a defending team is allowed to waste up to 40 seconds before taking a drop-out. Crazy. The clock shud stop!!!
Dr NRL
Roar Rookie
Low hanging fruit ... exactly. The article above is purely basics, not rocket science. Be nice to see the NRL lay a platform with the basics covered. Then again,Cronulla can't draw and pass, so ... Just imagine the opportunity this would create in so many areas ... increased numbers of spectators attracted by a longer, more fulfilling experience (there's a tablet for that ...), more gate receipts, more food & drink sales, more advertising space ... plus the rest.
Dr NRL
Roar Rookie
Dogs, I like the idea of less interchange like you, and perhaps this is one way of doing it ... though I still prefer less interchange 'full stop'. Taking out fatigue as a factor is dragging us closer to NFL! Less interchange = bigger players. They can carry the extra 10-15kgs because endurance has been reduced as a factor. I'm not a fan of the 18th man at all, but see enormous value in stripping a team of a player based on foul play where a player is lost for the match - ie. John Cartright looks at the Manly bench when Fa'aoso polexes Harrison, and picks any one of those four to take no further part in the game. Clearly, Toovey would not want Watmough on the bench at that time. This is a clear, easily implemented deterrent to foul play. Keep it simple, rather than farting around with extra men.
oikee
Guest
They also have a mermaid in one of their museums. Yes a mermaid. They did a x-ray and found out it was a monkey's head sown onto a fish body, hehe, you have to laugh. They also had the original Mona Lisa painting hanging in a museum, wait for it, until they did a x-ray, yes, you guessed it, was a fake and someone had did a colouring drawing onto another picture of somebody from 100 years later. You have to laugh, good old yanks. These are the guys we follow blindly into battle, weapons of mass destruction and all that, and the president , the war in Iraq was a complete success, as hundreds are blowing themsleves apart this very day. Cant wait to hear, Afganistan is a complete success, as the poppy fields are irrigated and the Taliban run riot once they are gone.
oikee
Guest
Haha, mate, i was watching a new show last night, about Museums , hidden treasures / items, something like that, anyhow the yanks had a square box filter in one of their museums. It looked like a dogs breakfast, that is what got me interested, otherwise i would have switched channels. This boxy thing was part of the Apollo 13 disaster. What had happened was as you know, they all had to get into the small capsale as the big one blew up. But they did not have enough Oxygen to support 3 blokes, so they had to create a filter out of a square box to fit a round hole. ?? Sound confusing, yes, that is what i thought, anyhow i am getting to the good part right about now. Mate, i was rolling around the floor, laughing me socks off, they had Nassa, with all the engineers, Genius's and scientists and scholars all working on this square box to fit in a round hole. Hahhaaha. All they come up with was put some gause or filter paper over the square box and keep it in the square hole. You have to laugh, 36 hours it took them to come up with this solution, Straight off i thought , these guys could run rugby league, we would not even notice the change. hehe. True story, the box i mean, it is sitting in the musuem, Aussies would have thrown that sucker in the bin, where it belonged. hehe.
oikee
Guest
Spot on Dogs, and dont complicate things. Your very first sentence is spot on, i agree with your first sentence, then you brought doubt, thought process and dogs breakfast into it after that. hehe. Keep it simple, and stright forward. And not to mention, fatigue would play a larger part in the game, thus meaning that we don’t need to reduce interchanges to make the game better., you said... Spot on.
Dogs Of War
Roar Guru
And not to mention, fatigue would play a larger part in the game, thus meaning that we don't need to reduce interchanges to make the game better. Still I think only 2 should be able to be interchanged all the time and 2 should be direct replacements only. Still on the fence whether we should have a 18th man who can only be used if there is a game ending injury, cause I am sure some coaches would work out a ploy to make that player part of the rotation somehow, or force a player who is already injured ie Benji Marshall this week, play a game, but if he isn't 100%, come off and use the 18th man to cover him.
Bazzio
Roar Guru
Dear Doctor, Intelligence and forethought do not come with the names or positions of appointments. Such attributes come from people who actually have them ~ usually intelligent and thoughtful people by my crude appraisal. This means that if you put a bunch of smart guys in a room to discuss a problem, smart solutions will ensue. On the other hand, a room full of dopes will come up with a dopey decision. I'm, sure you can join the dots from there Kind regards, Bazzio
ferret
Guest
Moonshine, I hadn't thought about the link to betting but it's a very good point. As they say "money talks" and betting in the NRL uses a megaphone cranked up to "11". As I've posted elsewhere there is a distinct lack of perspective in this "is a spear tackle worthy of a send-off?" disucssion. On one hand, a player might well get his neck broken and be confined to a wheelchair FOR LIFE!! Loss of income, loss of quality of life. On the other hand, worst case scenario, a team loses 2 points from a season where 52 are available. So are Mr Toovey, and Mr Sterling arguing that the second is more important that the first?!?! But your point about betting does appear to balance the scales up and what about refs being "bought"? However, my answer to that is two-fold - (i) it's only a game and (ii) a fool and their money are easily parted - so if you're dumb enough tp take a punt then ... NRL - protect your players they are your primary assest! And no-one, not just mums but dads as well, wants their kids playing a sport where a broken neck is seen as an unfortunate possibility.
Elijah Weightman
Roar Guru
Unfortunately it seems as though it's that time of the month again for Oikee. Only a week or two ago he had his epiphany and claimed that the game was going great guns and the executives were genius's. Now it's being run by amateurs and dinosaurs again. Hopefully they do fix up the time wasting surrounding scrums though, pet hate of mine. Golden point and dead in goal rules should be re-worked as well. In all honesty though, at least we're not in rugby union's position.
turbodewd
Guest
Dr NRL, i agree with your diagnosis and prescription and have been saying the same thing for years. If the ball goes dead the clock must stop. We dont play 80 minutes of football, its actually around 55-57min. We should make the game 60 or 70min and enforce time stoppages. If anything we would end up with slightly longer games - 5/15min longer.
Moonshine
Guest
Oikee- calm down - youll still be watching this weekend...
oikee
Guest
Hehe, welcome to my world, where this game, this primitive game which is run by backward thinking dinosaurs who seem to be able to bury real issues and then con us with make believe cures, lets call them, when we all have had answers for years. Look, until they get rid of the Torso rule, they will and always will be dinosaurs. It is a dinosaur rule, allowed to continue to smoulder and only stopped by refs blowing the whistle so the video ref cant get his claws onto it. This game is a amatuer run joke. And to treat it any other way until we see real change is not worthy a mention. Glad you brought this up, for the 50th time. Mate, go get a wall, and bang your head aghaisnt it, 24/7, and then, and only then, welcome to my world and rugby league, the code run like a dogs breakfast. "Duty of Care", dont even get me started on this, again, rugby league dropped the ball. I cant even talk about this, it is to upsetting.