On Channel Nine‘s The Footy Show last Sunday, City Origin coach Brad Fittler questioned the way Josh Jackson played the ball that led to Sam Perrett’s try for the Bulldogs versus Panthers on Saturday night.
“I know nobody uses their foot anymore, and that’s fine,” said Fittler.
“But you have to make a genuine attempt to use the foot. They’ve let it go too far – and I saw the referee’s eyes – he was looking straight at the play-the-ball.”
Fittler thought the tolerance was too great. They’d crossed the line. Well, Freddie, you’re a coach and you have helped us to get this point. So where is the line you’re talking about?
What’s good enough to play on and what should be penalised? I’ll come back to the concept of a figurative ‘line in the sand’ for the officials shortly.
Later on Sunday The Roar columnist Matt Elliott was brought to account by a wonderful caller from Coffs Harbour who (in between spotting migrating humpback whales off the coast) found time to phone in to ABC Grandstand.
“Every time I’ve been to a game and seen the warm-up the players don’t use their foot – they just roll it between their legs. So I think people like you are partly to blame. If that’s what they train to do they’ll do it in the game,” she said.
Of course she was right. Matt Elliott put his hand up straight away. It drives the fans crazy, but the coaches don’t want the foot on the ball – they get a quicker play the ball away. It helps their attack on the next tackle.
As far as the laws are concerned, a player must heel the ball back after rising to his feet and bringing the ball off the ground. Forget about those latter two points for the time being. That’s for another day. As far as the officials are concerned, they are instructed to allow the play-the-ball if there is a ‘genuine attempt’ to use his foot.
So what constitutes a ‘genuine attempt’? Well that depends upon who you ask. Referees bosses have tried ever since I can remember to get all the referees on one page when it comes to these ‘discretionary’ points. If, as a touch judge, the ball hits the touch line you need to put the flag up – no two ways about it. If a player on the 10-metre line leaves early but the ball goes the other side of the ruck, you hold off telling the referee – discretionary.
They are both correct decisions in today’s game.
What about flopping on the tackled player, or getting a foot on the ball to play it? Markers not being square when the dummy half tries to milk a penalty? Those call on the referee’s judgment, and between the 20 or so referees in the full-time NRL squad their opinions can vary.
In 2008 when I came into the NRL Robert Finch was the referees’ coach and he spent the next three years trying to get all the referees to penalise players for ‘flopping in’ on the tackle. We see it every week: player held on the ground and a split second later another defender jumps on top. Sometimes they get off quickly and sometimes they don’t. Sometimes they are penalised and sometimes they are not.
Finchy wanted every one of them penalised. It will get it out of the game, he argued. The only thing that the player flopping in is trying to do is slow down the play-the-ball. Penalise every one and we will eradicate it.
The only thing he didn’t count on is that not all the referees abided. Some did, while others deliberately allowed one or two a game knowing they would be wrapped on the knuckles come Monday for not awarding a penalty. It didn’t matter. They wouldn’t get on board.
By the end of 2010 Robert Finch was given his marching orders and Bill Harrigan and Stuart Raper were given the job of coaching the referees. Billy was clear in what he wanted during his administration: a policy of ‘back to basics’.
Get them on-side at the kick off, get a foot on the ball, get the defenders’ body mass in line with the referee on the 10 metres, and for God’s sake don’t miss any forward passes from dummy half. Simple.
The only thing he didn’t count on is the same thing that Finch had trouble with. The referees didn’t ‘buy in’ to his vision. Certainly there were a lot who did. Most of the junior referees would penalise when they were required to, only to see their more senior peers brush things and then simply cop the criticism on review.
I’ll give you a specific example of how hard it is to get all the 16 appointed referees each week to see things the same way.
In 2011 the referees were at training at Sydney Olympic Park when the topic of goal-line drop outs was raised. Billy threw the ball to Phil Haines and asked him to simulate a restart of play via a goal-line dropout.
“Kick it on the line,” were his instructions.
For the second kick, while all the full-time referees were observing, Billy asked Hainsey to drop it fifteen centimetres out from the goal-line.
“Now who’s going to penalise that?” Billy challenged. Shakes of head all round.
Third up the kick was from 30 centimetres out. Still bemused looks from the refs, but nobody willing to penalise.
The next kick was half a metre over the goal-line, at which point two hands went up to indicate that they would penalise the kicking team for dropping it out over the line.
One metre over the line and finally half the referees put their hands up saying they would penalise. Hoorah! Some progress.
The final kick was two metres over the goal-line and still there were shakes of the head. Billy had seen enough.
“None of you blokes can agree on where the line is. Every one of those kicks was over the line, and you blokes can’t work out whether 30 centimetres or two metres is enough for a penalty. I’ll tell you where the line is – it’s where the line is marked. I don’t care how far over it is – if it’s over, penalise them.”
Well, from what I can tell it all went downhill from there. The referees as a group were never on the same platform, let alone in the same train carriage.
So Freddie, when your boys are getting a foot to the ball – where’s that line again?
Howie
Guest
You are right. Interpretations change in a single game, let alone in different games. How often is a player held down in the first 5 minutes - Penalty. Twice as long at the end of the game - Let go Or offside inside the "10". In Origin 1, the difference in the offside call in both halves was substantial. It becomes really confusing when you have 2 Refs and one ref is blowing penalties that the other isn't.
Bulldog
Guest
Dan - it might be a subject for another article but what are your thoughts on the refs not blowing penalties for offside when field goals are being attempted at the end of a game or in golden point. A perfect example was the Cowboys vs Raiders game where the Raiders were clearly offside when JT was attempting a field goal. Should have been a penalty right in front - game over. All the commentators after the game (FOX Sport) seemed to think it was OK because "that is what the refs do is those tight situations!!!" Are refs instructed not to make decisions at crucial times of the game to avoid scrutiny??
Bulldog
Guest
I have to disagree with your change. My thoughts are that playing the ball with your foot requires the player to be properly on their feet before they play the ball. For me there has been too much latitude shown in players not getting to their feet properly to play the ball. Lately there has been players putting the ball on the ground before they have gotten to their feet trying milk penalties. It drives me insane - and do not get me started on playing the ball off the mark.... Ok I have had my rant now.
Jay C
Roar Guru
Lol, yeah. I looked for somewhere better to put it yesterday but all anyone was interested in was Parra. Without looking at anyone's run home it seems around about right. The Warriors are always a week to week proposition but they have been good in the games I have watched.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Jay - that's too interesting a comment to have hidden at the bottom of a referee article. I think you might be right...my main concern would be the Warriors. They always surge at this time if year to fall away after origin. Not sure who of the bottom 8 could make a run.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Yep
AlinBris
Roar Rookie
A simple solution is at hand - ditch the video ref (other than for uncertainty AT trys - not for resolution of a possible knock on 90 metres down the field), return to the single referee model (it still works in International games), Penalize illegal play according to the real rules of Rugby League and ensure the commentators don't throw doubt into the equation through the use of the word 'contentious'. Somehow, in other sports, the players tend to make the mistakes - it is only Rugby League where we have come to believe it is the referee's fault that a player knocked the ball on... If we keep up this nonsense, we will head in the same way as European soccer where the referee can risk injury or even his life because of a call that some hooligan believes was wrong. It's already gone close this year when the Officials were pelted with water bottles for actually making a 100% correct decision...
AlinBris
Roar Rookie
And so the cycle continues. Unless we can get the referees adjudicating by the current rules (I.e. none of this take it back to the mark BS and Penalize them for moving off the mark), how could rewriting the rule book make any sort of difference to the outcome? We have a perfectly workable set of rules and interpretations! Simply apply the appropriate penalties where they are required and watch how fast the players and coaches come into line... We could then get back to the game many of us love - Rugby League...
The Prize_Man
Roar Pro
Margin of error? they have at least 8m of ingoal area to kick it from. how can you accidently kick it from over the line? aim for 30cm before the line and as you say their isnt any advantage or disadvantage so just kick it from behind. I say the line is the line. rd 1, origin or gf. so your line is 30cm out? what if its 31cm? do you penalise that?
steveng
Roar Rookie
We don't really care about Ch9's news and whatever else they advertise (which takes up most of the screen and playing area of the TV) throughout their coverage of RL. Ch9 have gotten more and more into thinking that their contract of covering the RL is a 'free for all' for them to have add breaks whenever and sometimes in the middle of a live coverage. We don't care and I would rather pay for an add free coverage of ALL RL GAMES and not be hijacked and forced to watch RL on Ch9 on Fridays and Sundays throughout the NRL season. As far as time wasting the NRL should adapt the AFL 'time off' which is automatically stopped whenever the ball is out of play or the game come to a stoppage, or a goal kick is prepare to be kicked, that would be a fairer and more useful way of teams 'wasting time' and it would take allot of pressure off the referees.
Jay C
Roar Guru
This was an interesting read mate and highlights the biggest issue that all managers fave. That is getting their team to buy into their vision. It's tough, and not everyone can do it, but it is essential in the framework of leadership. It seems pretty straightforward and i have to say i agree with Billys view. Don't decide how much the team can get away with. That's why we are in the mess we are in. Also. Speaking of whatever. Looking at the ladder today and i get the feeling we are looking at the top 8. The order might change but i don't think the make up will change too much.
The Barry
Roar Guru
I think it's about the diameter of a footy so say 30cm. The player kicking isn't getting an unfair advantage (well they are but it's 30 cm) and it allows for a margin of error in executing a dropout. Anything more than that and the player is taking the Micky and deserves to be penalised.
bbt
Guest
Agree totally. Doesn't need to be a penalty, just blow the whistle and getting them back on the mark is punishment enough. Unless they persist. Just breaking the momentum of the side with the ball will do.
turbodewd
Guest
players walking forward off the mark (where tackle occured) is another pet hate of mine. why do refs not blow the whistle?
Jasper
Guest
Why isn't "he's milking it" a penalty against that team? It is cheating.
Boz
Guest
Exactly Dan. @ The Barry - All I want is consistency. If the rule states the drop kick must be taken behind the line, then yes, if he goes over, even by a little way - then he should be penalised. I would have no problem with this, as long as it is done consistently - in every game, by every referee. If a player can't drop the ball behind the line - bad luck!
pete bloor
Guest
Because each boss is different and they keep changing. When you know the fans/media will get the guy at the top fired more regularly than sepp takes a bribe why would referees change anything? In any other profession once you get turnstile leadership you get people freelancing, referees are no different.
Jasper
Guest
I seen NRL referees allow Preston Campbell to use a grubber kick at a goal line drop out. Obviously under the NRL anything passes for a drop kick.
Dan Eastwood
Expert
Yes Cugel, Billy tried that too ...
Ian
Guest
I think there's a lot to be said for short arm penalties or free kicks rather than full penalties for most things other than foul play. So you might get a 10m advance down the field instead of a kick for touch. Then you might have a limit of free kicks per half, say 5 after which all penalties are full penalties (sort of like basketball where you get free throws every foul after x number), to discourage teams just giving penalties away. Also using the sin bin to discourage repeated penalties would be good - like union refs who give a team warning after a few quick penalties in a row then yellow card the next offender regardless of whether he was a previous offender.