I’ve noticed a trend this final series, and indeed this season. No, not that online betting companies have had more airtime than the game itself, a more quizzical one.
It seems that more and more players have been slow to get to their feet having received a high tackle which has been missed by the referee. More often than not, after a quick replay, the apparent high shot has been deemed illegal.
The victim then rises to their feet, and the attacking side march down the field on the back of the penalty. Curious, isn’t it?
This year the referees have been more liberal with allowing the video referee to review the play after the man being tackled has been slow to their feet.
MORE NRL GRAND FINAL:
» Issac Luke can only blame himself if he misses the final
» TURNER: Bulldogs will show bite in the Grand Final over the Bunnies
» Dally M: Sharing is caring as Thurston and Hayne share medal
» NRL Grand Final hub
» Hayne and Sutton to referee NRL Grand Final
It’s a legitimate move. There has been an increased focus on player safety (rightfully so), and obviously penalising high shots, whether deliberate or reckless, is a vital part of cracking down on dangerous play. But players have cottoned on.
In years gone by, the Paul Harragons and Spud Carrols would have hated to stay down and let their opponent get the best of them. Now it seems the benefit of an extra set of six is outweighing the value of bravado.
There have been occasions where referee microphones have picked up team mates encouraging the player to stay down, and grace the ref with the time to go upstairs and check the contact.
Can you blame the players? An extra set of six is invaluable to the side, not to mention the ground gained from the kick downfield.
I don’t doubt that some tackles that legitimately stun the players, and this is why we have the concussion rule. However, I feel a large portion know the review will go in their favour, so they bleed it out.
The concern is that the game is copping plenty of criticism for becoming soft. No one wants to see this go the way of soccer, with players foxing in order to receive the penalty advantage. So is it just another tactical part of the game that we need to accept?
Can you blame the ref? Officials, as much as we may wish they were, aren’t infallible. They have been known to occasionally miss the odd indiscretion.
If a player has committed a foul, is it not fair to stop to check the play, or is this just one step closer to the game being rule by the video ref and a TV remote?
The man in the middle is compelled to hold up play in order to make sure the player is uninjured, but should he be encouraging refs to ask players to rise to their feet, if he feels they can continue?
So I ask the Roarers, what’s your belief? Should they take the penalty or are they taking the piss? Is it ok to stay down, or shake it off, and give up the opportunity for the penalty?
Whichever way the NRL goes with handling this development, for the love of god and the game, please, impart a level or measurable consistency.
Gareth Kidd
Roar Guru
Hahaha, unless you're Gus Gould. In which case you're dispensing criticism to all officials!
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Of course. It does come back that the referee should have picked it up in the first place. Referees rely too much on the video ref to pick these things up. Being cynical, it means the video ref then cops the blame not him.
Gareth Kidd
Roar Guru
True, but you also have the flip side. Player gets hit high, should be a penalty. Ref misses it. Does he not deserve the penalty anyway?
Cadfael
Roar Guru
That is a good thought. If the player stays down for the tackle to be reviewed, the player goes off for treatment. If the Video ref finds there was something in the tackle, the replacement doesn't count for the subs but if the video ref finds nothing, the sub counts. Hopefully that would make the player (and coach) think twice.
Hoy
Roar Guru
I agree with Luke. Stay down, you must go off... OR, leave it, the Ref makes some odd hand signal, and the Third Match Official has that time in teh game for the Match Reveiw Committee to come back to it later and assess the tackle. Most of the time the offender is put on report anyway...
Luke M
Guest
If you stay down and get a hight tackle penalty, you go off for a 15 min concussion test. That will separate milking from legitimate injury pretty damn quickly. I have noticed multiple times this season a player stays down like he is knocked out, then gets up and takes the first or second hit up after the penalty. That is not a good look.
Gareth Kidd
Roar Guru
Yeah see it's tough cause we quite often laud the players that get up and play on (Dallas Johnson in Origin), but the science is showing how dangerous that is. I think the culture is changing towards these injuries, but the last thing we want is a soccer-like version of foxing. Luckily it can't get to that point as the video ref will catch out the true BS artists.
The Barry
Guest
I hate players staying down. But I will never criticise a player for it again until the rules change. Your team gets rewarded if you stay down. You get nothing if you struggle to your feet. Sam Burgess hit SBW first point of contact on the jaw. The refs saw it but wanted to go to the video. When he got up they said play on. Instead of a penalty and a report there was nothing done about it. Sam isn't the only one just the most recent and high profile. We also had the refs audio saying "I have high contact." The other thing is that now someone gets hit in the head, are slow to get up and they get booed when it could all be legitimate.