Saturday night’s semi-final between the Bulldogs and Sea Eagles had it all. Great tries, biffs, dramatic field goals and a loud and enthusiastic crowd.
Even the strangest rule in rugby league managed to rear it’s indifferent head.
Of course the rule I am referring to regards what happens when the ball hits the referee directly from the restart.
CATCH UP ON THE LATEST NRL HIGHLIGHTS
For those who didn’t know, and to be honest it’s something most people wouldn’t know, if the ball strikes a referee the team enjoying territorial position restarts the game with a scrum and a fresh set of six tackles.
On Saturday night the Bulldogs were correctly given a fresh set upon the ball hitting the referee from what looked almost like a deliberate ploy.
Upon being reminded of the rule, I am surprised that more teams don’t aim for the referee if nothing else is on. Given the skill levels of kickers these days, surely it’s not out of the question to hit the man in pink from 10 or so metres away.
Being an ideas man, I’d like to see the referee treated just like a goal post in this situation. It’s play on if the ball hits the referee, and the quickest to react gains possession.
If the attacking team hit the referee on the fifth tackle and regather the ball, they simply plan on. If the defending team reacts first, it’s tackle zero, just as if the ball had hit the goal post.
I’ve been watching rugby league for 25 or so years and I honestly can’t remember the last time a referee deliberately ran into the path of the ball.
In the past few seasons I can faintly remember maybe three occasions where this rule came into effect, but to award the team with territorial advantage a fresh set seems like a massive leg up.
If this rule stays, surely players could just see there was nothing to come from the last tackle and simply grubber a kick into the referee’s legs. They’d obtain a fresh set of six if they chose to do so. It’s a cheap tactic, but the rules allow for it.
I can’t think of a stranger rule in the NRL playbook. If you know of one, I’d sure love to hear it shared below.
THE ELF
Guest
Thanks Matt I agree with one of the other's that when the ball hit the ref it did not IRREGULARLY affect play. The fact that the word IRREGULARLY is in the laws contemplates that there are situations when a ball comes in contact with the referee and it does not IRREGULARLY affect play and its play on. Its a factual decision based on the circumstances. I think the ref just thought the ball touched me so I'll blow my whistle without assessing the facts. Once he blew his whistle the decision was made and had to be a scrum to the dogs. The Elf
matt
Guest
search laws of rugby league 2014 or playnrl.com.au
THE ELF
Guest
Where can you look at these rules. Thank you. The Elf
Freddy
Guest
missing a field goal and the defending side gets a 20 metre restart and seven tackles- the same thing would happen if the attacking side put in an attacking kick (grubber) from less than 1o metres out which went dead - 20 metre restart and seven tackles- surely the rule wasn't for these types of kicks it was i thought for the non attacking kick that was deliberately used to put the ball dead so the attacking side could set their defence for the 20 metre restart.
Clark
Guest
Once a grub always a grub
Nafe
Guest
Stop with the bloody rule changes all the time. There was nothing wrong with the game a decade ago until all the rule changes and interpretations. Now even the rules of Rugby Union are more understandable.
seajay23
Guest
Reynolds had inquired about the rule the day before the game, to me it was a deliberate ploy; typical Reynolds - he fits in well at the Dogs.
Luke M
Guest
It wouldnt surprise me to see a player actually locate the ref and chase him to kick at him.
Pricey80
Guest
The rule states the "attacking team"... but in the laws, the attacking team is defined as the one that has the territorial advantage. The attacking mean doesn't actually mean the team in control of the ball. There's some other technicalities which make me feel the decision was incorrect. 1) The Law is carefully worded that the scrum is awarded only if the contact with the referee IRREGULARLY affects play. Given that there were several Manly players near the ball (and no chasers) - it was an expected result that Manly would have taken possession, and so therefore play wasn't "IRREGULARLY" affected. 2) It would have been a tough call for the referee to make, but if he felt it was deliberately kicked with the intention to make contact with him (and a lot of people do believe it was deliberate), it should have been a penalty to Manly. 3) Even if it wasn't deliberate, and the referee decides it irregularly affected the outcome... the scrum should have been awarded from where Reynolds last touched the ball. But instead, he mistakenly awarded the scrum where it hit him, giving the Dogs a 15m bonus (on top of the extra six tackle bonus) and a gift field goal position only 25m out. He clearly wasn't sure about the rules (as he initially awarded the scrum the other way) so he should've consulted with his team to get it right. Manly were dead unlucky.
Realist 1975
Guest
At least the Referees are consistent in that manner. I wonder which referee will blow a penalty when the opposition are preparing for a drop goal. Hate for it to be in the GF. In terms of Reynolds kicking the ball and the ball hitting the referee. Well, IMHO the NRL chiefs should change the rule immediately to "play on". Don't think that other teams won't try aiming at the referee if the need arises.
Jay C
Roar Guru
Different situation. Queensland were on the attack at the line and again, I thought it was the attacking team not the side which is territorially advantaged.
Kilbongteb
Guest
You say it's unfortunate we are talking about rules, and then go on to talk about them- yup your a bright one
Harry wells
Guest
Tune in if H and C are reffing they will be close games with the old second half comeback. Masters wrote about refs orchestrating games 2 years ago and it still goes on - all the decisions went to the NQ from 36 min to 57min for the score go from 6-30 to 30-30
Clark
Guest
Panthers will dominate the middle next week. The Bulldogs are a very slow team and trouble scoring points. Their only good player is James Graham
Kevin
Guest
The rule definitely needs to be changed urgently. Imagine the uproar if same thing decided the GF. (especially if Cowboys were involved) Kicker purposely kicks ball into ref on 6th tackle to get another set. They will all be on to it now! Rule should be re-play the ball again from same spot and same tackle e.g. 6th. If it still 6th tackle all OK and no particular advantage for either team. Clear and simple rule.
BLACK PANTHER
Guest
barry wake up ,don't worry about what that old fart harrigan say. The attacking team not the territorial advantage
Parrafan
Guest
Liam that is the most commonsence way of officiating that rule I have heard. Bring it in next year.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
There concern is that their decision may decide the game however in doing nothing, they are deciding the game.
Paul
Guest
What kind of rule is this (six again) . Just blow the whistle and replay that tackle!!!!!!!!!!!!!
djcooper
Roar Guru
When DCE tried to line up that last field goal, reynolds was well over 5 mtrs offside and not one of the officials picked it up. Good luck to him for getting away with it but it seems when the game was on the line in the last 10 minutes (in both games) the refs put their whistles away and refuse to adjudicate as per the previous 70 minutes.