Opinions are like navels – everyone has one. But paid ‘experts’ should have informed and consistent ones (opinions that is, not navels).
Rugby league has a handful of perennial posers which we all like to weigh in on. Here are my opinions on them.
Round 13 rule
A player agents get a shiny new deal wrapped up for their client, then spends all the time they have left until Round 13 trying to get him a better deal!
The rule was a reverse reaction attempt in the first place. By allowing players to change their minds it was hoped that clubs would stop signing players so very early, because if the NRL did not recognise the contract prior to Round 13, it was effectively worthless.
Read more from Brian Smith at SmithySpeaks
What’s the solution?
Let’s try a different date: no contract is binding until one week after grand final day. It won’t stop conjecture but it will stop the embarrassing state our professional game is in at present.
If the players agree to that, perhaps the clubs might agree to $100,000 fines for any club found negotiating prior to that one week post-grand final.
While we are at it, perhaps a new rule for player agents too? Maybe a three-year suspension for participating in any negotiations before the trading date deadline.
Should send-offs return?
The temperature of many rose remarkably when Dragons forward Tyson Frizell was not dismissed for contact with an opponent’s head. If a hit of that nature didn’t get Frizzell an early shower, what exactly does it take to get sent off?
Because it’s been so long since anyone was sent off it has become rare in the extreme for that course of action to be taken by a referee, perhaps everyone whose temperature rose also had memory failure. The referees who did send players off in the past ‘ruined the game’.
The reluctance to send players off has come about for a reason. Let the off-field process be the judge, except in the most absolute of circumstances.
Obstruction rule revisited
If I hear another commentator or upset fan rant “those refs and video refs are hopeless” or “no wonder we are turned off watching footy”, I will… Well, I was about to rant too.
History shows some teams started pushing the boundaries of the shepherd rule while others turned it into a science, until it became an exercise in how many obstruction plays could be manufactured in a game.
Small steps by refs and rule makers generated no deterrent. At the same time, coaches and players were developing more sophisticated ploys, stopping the defensive line in attack or deliberately crashing into the block runner in defence.
Former refs boss Daniel Anderson had a strong interpretation: any player in front of the ball causing a distraction or block on a defender would be penalised.
Some of those who screech and threaten now were also the loudest to complain when this definitive action was introduced, claiming the attack was being penalised for quality play. A watered-down change came in pretty quickly.
They now continue to cite that the defender was not close enough to have prevented the break or try. But was an inside defender illegally disrupted slightly enough for the next defender to be hesitant in releasing quickly enough to get to the eventual threat on the outside? That’s the cornerstone of modern defence: release or commit. They are fraction-of-second decisions which win and lose games.
We even had commentators going off the deep end last Sunday when Robbie Farah ran behind a lead runner to create space for a try-scoring opportunity. When the officials said “no” it was rant time again.
Now they are saying the officials are confused and need to be more consistent. Who caused that?
For many reasons a strong stance needs to be taken on lead runners, but a stronger stance needs to be taken against the whiners.
Statler and Waldorf
Roar Guru
you do realize that League came into being so the players could be proffesionals not amatuers don't you?
The Barry
Roar Guru
Sheek, I'm with you on the lack of integrity - the round 13 system actually rewards a lack of integrity and has to be changed. But hamstringing players into not being able to negotiate until they're out if contract isn't the solution.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Why should he have to? How would you feel if you knew your contract at work was going to in October, you were confident that you could attract more money elsewhere but were told that you weren't allowed to negotiate until AFTER your contract had expired? In your industry there's also a high chance that you'll have to re-locate to another city and report to work in early November. So, you have a month to find a suitable employer, negotiate terms for your next three year contract. Find a house, sell your existing property, move your family, find schools, etc. In a month! That scenario is ridiculous and you wouldn't stand for it. Why should a footballer?
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
Sorry, Sheek. iPad's auto spell checker changed it to sheep. Sorry.
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
Sheep, I think you are better off finding integrity within individuals. Groups can't create it, they can only hide it.
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
It is show biz. Very much so.
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
Australian morality seems forever bound with the sporting ethos.
sheek
Roar Guru
Thanks Glenn, I understand that & it can still be done with integrity.
sheek
Roar Guru
Something I can respect & admire for the integrity of the players, teams & sport itself.
sheek
Roar Guru
And securing his future can't wait until the end of the season?
sheek
Roar Guru
Greed, greed, greed, greed, greed.
Justthetip
Guest
I love that you have called out some league commentators on their contradictory opinions on what's wrong in regards to rules. There's times some authorities on the game use their media position as a cathartic release. Their bias opinions have less benefit than tuck shop ladies gossip. Brian for the amount of time you have spent in the game and all you can offer are the safest opinions. Why have blocker plays and plays that borderline illegal so popular now. Is it not that the game has surpassed the excessive interchanges and has created a game where it's much rarer for sides to be attacking disorganised defensive lines. How Phil Gould can whinge about aspects of the game. The increase in players athleticism coupled with coaches ability to utilise the parameters set to perfect having their defence set for nearly ever run, has created the blocker play fad and increased slowing tactics. The knights vs cowboys game saw the cowboys make an error after putting Newcastle under pressure with and without the ball for a good 5 mins. The knights took 2-3 mins to then set their scrum and the cowboys smart football loses advantage once knights got their breath back. Phil's highlighted this which is great but sees enough gains in minimising time wasting that interchange reduction won't be necessary to encourage endurance. Doesn't show enough regard for the viewer who with today's technology is entitled to see a reply with a decent camera angle and an opinion on footy. Minimising time wasting is a great move but useless when his media bosses will put ads before a replay of the knock on we're all sure we saw. Vid ref time taken seems to have really increased on average coinciding with fans looking at the same footage refs are using to make their decision. One drawn out decision was seen every few games but sometimes is now seen a few times a game. Taking league back towards instinctive footy and away from channel 9's list of demands would surely be a huge hit with fans. Fox provides an entirely superior experience and doesn't promote negative controversy so unashamedly. The mid week chat show commentators are effectively used to address the games issued and are generally well measured when doing so..
The Barry
Roar Guru
Yep.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Doing deals isn't then problem. The problem is the round 13 date where player managers set different clubs up against each other to get a better deal even if it means breaking a contract. Once the contract has been signed,. lodge it.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Sorry Brian but send off should still be on the books. They work in both football and rugby. To just put a player on report is a complete abrogation of their role. The reporting system came in for cases that the referee and touch judges couldn't see clearly not as a general sop for the refs to pass the buck. Frizell lifted the player over the horizontal and stayed on the field. A similar tackle in Super Rugby yesterday saw the offending player marched. Why not in league?
Doc79
Roar Rookie
10 mins in the bin for high shots a must especially now we have the concussion rule. I don't see merit in removing the culprit from the game next week especially when your star player is on the ground out cold. Would that be tolerable in a grand final?
GTW
Guest
Very well said AJ, the "after the GF" trade period lends itself to us losing the best players to other sports. I think the Round 13 rule can stay, but there needs to be a penalty for backflips. Take the DCE case; if he backflips then he and his manager should pay the Titans 20% of the negotiated salary for the first year. That would give them an incentive to honour the agreement with the Titans. It would also make it less likely that the Titans would be "used" by DCE to say to Manly - I'm worth $1.25m a year, so you better pay me $1.3m if you really want me. The bigger issue may be the disappointment that Manly fans feel in losing one of their champions, it makes the whole year an emotional waste of time. Could the player signings only be announced once the GF is over? That would be the best outcome, but it's probably extremely unlikely that such news wouldn't leak out as it happens (i.e. about this time each year). Now that RL is big business, the players, managers, and clubs are primarily concerned with the financial aspects of the game. The fans are the ones who "love" their teams and care enormously about which players play for their team this year and next. Whatever change is made, it's the fans who need to be considered first, as if we all get alienated, who will be paying the bills in the coming decades?
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
What do you expect sport to be for you?
The Barry
Roar Guru
I know you're an old timer but do you really expect sport to be played like it was in the 1850's? Anyway we're not talking insidious big business, we're talking about a player trying to secure the best possible future for himself.
Glenn Innes
Guest
Sheek - What you are really talking about are the virtues of amatuerism (which is not indefensible).But just like you can't be half pregnant you can't be half amatuer, semi professionalism only existed because of a lack of revenue Once you agree to pay players you need a paying audience to raise the income to pay them, you are in showbiz whether you like it or not.Those crusty old Victorians knew that much.