A well intentioned crackdown can’t work, so what’s the answer?

Thanks Mike. I never thought of utilising it for offside but that’s so perfect. I’m not sure how it would work for forward passes because throwing a 15m pass at full pace I’d assume the technology would register a forward pass but it’s definitely worth investigating.

I didn’t specify number of players but that was my point. The one low one high front on also used to shorten people up. If defender is knocked back on his bum it’s a dominate tackle but no other time.

I agree Wayne and I believe the mess in the ruck originated from the prevelance of grab tackles.

To me a dominant tackle is 1 player dropping his opposite in one swift hit dropping him like a rock. The perfect leg tackle like the great halfbacks like sterling mortimer excelled at the type of tackle john sattler delivered in the grand final those are domunant tackles. Its time to reward those tackles and give those players more time to hold a opposition player down then rewarding a grab tackle that 2 other playes then become involved in to put a player on his back. A tackle requiring 3 people is not a dominant tackle in my eyes. Take the nonsense of calling a 3 man tackle dominant and watch the game then speed up

Great article and likewise comments. Well put to have technology decide forward passes, and also offsides. They just need a e-chip in the ball and in each players footy boots, no video ref required.

It's NOT helped by the refs getting decisions so wrong. egs: Giving attacking teams penalties to players that try to play the ball from the ground aka milking penalties.The ball player walking off the mark,then getting a penalty for the defender being offside/not square.Penalising a team for being offside in defense,but ignoring the other team doing the exact samething.

I won't argue the fact as it's just a concept. Although I cannot see any coach tagging a player with a faux C just to sacrifice him during the game due to the intention causing penalties.

yep, having to front Cam Smith after getting him binned would not rate on my bucket list of "fun things to do". Good idea though, Nat.

They an coaches in all American professional sports and it's certainly a deterrent over there. Same with professional soccer. Not sure why the same thing can't apply here at all. If you're worried about them continuing to coach, lock them in a room, take away all means of communication and leave them a TV so they can watch the game and see what the rest of us are having to put up with.

The bin hasn’t been a deterrent when most teams that have had a player binned go on and win. I’ve never seen so many teams have someone binned, be unaffected and go on and win. I understand your points system and it could work but it’s not a deterrent. I would create a spirit of the game suspension that’s seperate and incorporates the things I have mentioned and a few other things like diving. Also if the captain is held responsible the coaches would just put the official C on a player they could afford to lose while the true captain still runs the team. If you think 2 weeks is too long drop it to 1 but nothing less because if it’s only the threat of a possible suspension in the future it won’t get the coaches and players attention.

I agree with the Dragons and the Bunnies and Titans are showing they will be big improvers as the season progresses. The Dragons pack for its size is very fast and is probably why they appear unaffected. Players like Taumalolo are having less success because his relentless approach and stamina wears teams down. The more carries he takes in a game the more he begins to assert authority and gain more metres. His team earns a penalty, the other side gets a rest and he has to start again. Super league had the approach to make the game faster and more expansive which sounds positive and exciting. All it does it promote dummy half scoots which make 15-20 metres and then a speedster ripping through the defence. Those elements are great but too much of it results in a touch footy type of contest.

I appreciate the premise Jeffrey but I think a 2 week suspension is a touch too far. Sin binning, as we've seen multiple times this weekend, for repeated infringements is ample because taking a player out of the side for 10 mins causes all sorts of issues for that team including fatigue and disrupted defensive and attacking structures. Teams are so well drilled in these areas that taking one piece from their structure can cause issues. Although, instead of sending the player who causes the final infringement for 10, I would send the captain for he is the one warned to told to instruct his team. I wouldn't want to be the player who had the captain binned. The other reason a suspension is too much because it escalates what is currently suspension worthy. If 2wks is for offside (as the example) then what is an unintended high shot? What does Soliola get - life? Maybe a suspension period could apply like cricket points system. Every 10 penalties is 1 point, a players binned for repeated infringements is 5pts, 50pts accumulated over 4 weeks, the captain sits a game out.

Rugby let slight forwards passes in attacking situations go all the time. With the defensive line being closer they need to turn a blind eye to small infringements so enterprising play can be achieved. They also don’t have a traditional rule book but have more a set of guidelines for referees to interpret and you see refs that have different styles. This means altering tactics to suit the ref. I don’t think it’s an honest approach but they have little choice. I’m not a believer in perfect officiating and am more concerned with creating an environment that cleans the game up without the need for excessive penalties. The Roosters and Sea eagles played twice in the finals a few years ago and the first game was 4-2. It was end to end football and one of the best games I’ve seen. The Roosters were at this stage the only team that was intentionally giving away penalties but Manly’s Ball movement had it hard for the Roosters to create tackles where they could lay all over the runner. The Roosters attacked very similarly so it was fast, exciting and the quality was phenominal. The current direction the refereeing and rules are taking things will stop us seeing this in the future.

Clearly we disagree. Every game the Dragons have played has been a high standard, more recently the Bunnies and Gold Coast have got it together as well. Penrith and the Warriors have become more expansive with the extra space as well. They've worked out if you play the way the NRL wants you get the rewards. As a Canberra supporter I well remember the early 90's but this was back when the game moved from 5 to 10 metres and the coaches hadn't yet come to terms with it. They fought back with wrestling and not getting back so they must be penalised to get open football.

Banning coaches won’t work with the modern technology we have today. Too easy to communicate. Coaches will only change when it’s in their best interests. It will be in their best interest when the negative tactics I have mentioned affect their side negatively in following games and not just in that moment. Coaches only seek success and can’t be asked or relied upon to coach any other way. I can guarantee you that if hitting was the only dominate tackle and allowed the defender to lay on his opponent it would be a more attractive option for coaches. If executing hold tackles was fraught with deterrents it would become less useful in gaining an advantage and coaches would actively train the players accordingly. It’s actually very simple to implement and will only appear harsh for a short period. Once a coach loses a good player for 10 minutes and then the following 3 games he will do everything to correct this.

Like the way you break the line Jeffrey Lebowski. Excellent read. The disambiguation of the ARL/NRL Rule book has been atop my wishlist for decades. I look forward to the day where technology can instantly identify the forward pass. Until then the Bunker should be allowed to rule thereon.

Bear I don’t see the crackdown working at all. The quality of football has been lower than I can remember. The bin isn’t a deterrent because it’s having no affect on a side winning which has never before been the case. It’s not NFL and for the game to work there need to be as much flow as possible. Mandatory suspensions on top of binning will ensure the rules are adhered to without having the refs dictate a match by blowing penalties. The sentiment the NRL have is great but the execution is off.

A really well thought out piece, Jeffrey. Thanks for putting this together. I think we need to take a step back and look at the way the game has "evolved" and, more to the point, how long it's taken to get into the shape it was in, prior to the shakeup this season. I'm guessing much of the current play has been put in place by coaches in the past 10 years. Certainly grapple tackles, chicken wings, diving at players legs and carrying guys backwards 10 or more yards, took quite a while to come into vogue. More to the point, they've taken quite a while to stamp out of the game. We're now left with more subtle ways of slowing down play and the one that stands out is the ball runner being forced onto the ground, many seconds after he's been called held. Gould and his buddies will tell you players can't hear the ref in the heat of battle, but have no problems hearing them when it comes to getting a penalty, so why are they so selectively deaf when when they're bending the rules. Again though, this and other issues around the ruck have been problems for a number of years yet the watching public wants this fixed NOW. I'd love to see this fixed NOW, but that's not going to happen because it isn't the players, it isn't the refs, it's the coaches who are driving this style of play. All of things I mentioned above come from coaches therefore they need to fix it and if they don't, they should be penalised. You've given a number of good reasons why sin binning players etc, is not a deterrent, what about banning coaches? Repeated infringements gets both the player involved and the coach binned so they can have no contact on the field. Second offences for any player in the same side result in the coach missing the rest of the game and repeated offences mean the coach is not allowed to have any involvement with the team for a minimum of two weeks and is fined the amount of money they would have made for those games. This is all pie in the sky, but unless something dramatic like this occurs, I think we're just going to have to be patient.

The crack down this season is working very nicely. Apart from clubs like Melbourne and Cronulla, who seem to have wrestling and not getting back 10 coded in their DNA, everyone else is getting the message. There have been several really attractive games of NRL and the binning of players for professional fouls (AKA: cheating) and repeated infringements are a welcome response. Gould is oddly short sighted on this issue. Fair enough there may be a couple of games like Cronulla V Melbourne but the players are getting the point and are adhering to the rules in the majority of the other matches. The refs just need to keep doing what they're doing. It's in the interests of the NRL to encourage entertaining football to combat the coaches win-at-all-costs mindset. If a coach could win 2-0 each week after a dour, boring, wrestle-a-thon with sides standing 5 metres apart every set they will do it. Anyone coach who wants to see attractive football would not have introduced wresting to the NRL. Look at what coaches did to the scrum in league? They made it such a mess the authorities threw up their hands and gave up on them. I'd be happy if they adopted a foul system similar to basketball: If a player gives away 3 penalties he's in the bin. When he returns if he gives away another he gets an early shower. PS: I seem to be part of the very tiny minority here who enjoys NRL as much as union. It truly baffles me why some fans can't get their heads around both great games? If I had the time I could watch 8 games of union and 8 games of league every weekend.