Rugby league has rules, and it has rules.
There are rules that can’t be broken. There are rules that can be bent. There are rules that could go either way, depending upon the whim of the referee on the day.
And then there are rules that were made up on the fly, and once applied one way, that’s it, forever on thereafter – that’s the rule.
Example? This latest pandemic of dummy-halves passing the ball on purpose into a man prone on the ground.
It’s a rule that someone ruled once and that’s how it’s had to be ruled forever after.
The rule actually says if the prone player can’t get out of the way in time and the dummy-half passes it into him, it’s a scrum.
I don’t know why it’s not play-on. But rugby league hates mess at the play-the-ball, and there you go.
So no when you pass it into the bloke on the deck you win a penalty. Every time.
And you know why?
Because everyone wants … consistency.
How we’ve bayed for it.
The great God of Consistency, the holy grail of all things pure in this vexed greatest game of all rugby league, the thing that everyone – players and coaches and fans and media and the whole blessed job lot of us – has demanded of adjudications by the professional pea-men.
Consistency. That they all be the same.
Well, now we have it.
And you know what? It actually sucks.
That’s right – consistency sucks.
Consistency means that if a rule is ruled once thus it must be ruled that way all the time.
Consistency means ruling knock-on when the ball’s gone backwards.
It’s in the rules. The knock-back is a rule. Cooper Cronk was tackled last week, the ball shot out backwards 180 degrees behind him. He was hit in a tackle, the ball shot out behind him.
Knock-on.
Cooper Cronk (Photo by Ashley Feder/Getty Images)
It was not a knock-on. It was a knock-back. That is the rule. The ball has to travel towards the opponent’s try-line for it to be a knock-on.
That’s what it says in the rules.
And yet because people want consistency, every time the ball touches the ground, it’s ruled knock-on. Knock forward. Even if it’s gone back.
Because of consistency.
What happened to the knock-back? The poor, dear sweet knock-back, which is a rule as listed in the rule book, but isn’t actually ruled upon, the game’s adjudicators having decided it’s too hard and ‘messy’ to rule upon. It’s easier to just call everything forward, even when Cooper Cronk is hit hard in a tackle and the ball squirts out backwards to his own goal posts, oh yes, knock-on, it drives me spare.
Consistency!
Consistency means allowing the ball to go under the lock’s feet in the scrum, and for neither side to push.
Consistency means same-same-never-different.
It means that even though the rule book says X, because someone has ruled upon it in Y fashion, then must be ruled thus forever after amen.
Because otherwise it would be inconsistent. And that would be very bad. Apparently.
Rugby league has reached a point that consistent application of a rule is more important than correct application of the rule.
Fact-ity fact fact fact.
Fact.
[latest_videos_strip category=“football” name=“Football”]
Consider this latest new black of penalty-milking, the old (new) pass-the-ball-into-the-tackler-who’s-lying-on-the-ground-unable-to-move-because-he’s-just made-a-tackle trick.
Consistency has delivered us this.
You know what I’m talking about. Will Smith pulled one in last week’s early Friday game, and Anthony Milford did one in the latter.
Smith basically dropped the ball on the body of Issac Luke as he lay on the ground.
Milford’s one, there was no-one to pass to on the other side of the bloke he passed the ball into. He wasn’t passing it to one of his own players. He was milking a penalty.
And our referees – because everyone’s been yelling at them to be consistent – are massive milk-filled teets.
Rugby league knocks ‘gamesmanship’ in the form of diving in association football, yet can for some reason largely cop this sort of gamesmanship because … well, because rugby league doesn’t know how to feel about it.
I mean, hell! It’s consistent, isn’t it? It’s a rule that’s consistently applied…
And if one ref’s blown a penalty for it, then all refs must blow a penalty for it. Because consistency.
And you know what? The hell with consistency.
How about this instead – rule to the bloody rules of the game.
For each incident, adjudicate on its merits.
And if one game Will Smith wins a penalty, and the next one Anthony Milford does not, all good!
Because if a player wants to take a punt on milking a penalty, it should be just that – a punt, not a guaranteed win. Not a guaranteed two points or 80 metres downtown.
Paul Gallen found that out in the semi-final versus North Queensland last year. He thought his messy play-the-ball would win him a penalty because there’d been a penalty down the other end.
Gallen thought it would be squared up.
(Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
Gallen was wrong.
The ref then adjudicated on the incident. Which, one would suggest, is how it should be.
Again – why not just adjudicate each incident as it happens, not on what someone did last play, half, week, season?
Why not just rule it according to the rules?
Former ref and ref’s boss Greg McCallum is a friend of mine on Facebook, which mean I’ve never met the bloke and that we are indeed not friends. But he wrote something on his status thingy the other day about the Smith and Milford teet-sucking, and it was this.
“Notes on the Laws of the Game.
“Penalise intentional interference 10.(g). If the ball is played quickly, all players will not necessarily have time to retire the prescribed distance.
“They should be penalised only if they intentionally interfere with play – either actively or passively.
“If the interference with play is accidental, a scrum should be formed. “Interference should not be considered accidental when the player concerned has had opportunity to remove himself from the area in which play is taking place.
“I don’t think either player intentionally – passively or otherwise – breached the rules.
“It is not a good thing to see – almost as bad as diving in football etc.”
Which is true.
It is consistent, though.
So there is that.
McNaulty
Guest
Not all penalties should be the same. With ruck penalties including forward passes from DH and moving off the mark the penalty should be loss of territory, so take the play the ball backwards 20 metres. Same with holding down penalties. There should be no tackle count restart.
Nick
Roar Guru
"until a computer program and technology can decide for us." We are already there. Soccer has offside technology. It's exactly the same. Put a line up from the point of the ball leaving the hand. If the ball crosses the line - it travelled forward. enough said.
Jarijari
Guest
And there's still this one: The tackled player shall be immediately released and shall not be touched until the ball is in play.
Forty Twenty
Guest
More education for the refs etc on forward passes might help. I'd like to hear their explanation on why they let some of the worst ones go. At least 3 if not 4 refs and touchies misses the odd pass that everyone else sees straight away. Why? Do they see it but take the safest option for their own sake? I can understand that based on Corey Normans apparent verbal assault on the touchie last night. The touchies in particular need to be brave and get support.
Forty Twenty
Guest
Tries scored off blatant forward passes or denied off fair ones are devastating in close games in particular. Of course we have a fair idea from a replay if it is forward or not . The marginal ones will always be controversial until a computer program and technology can decide for us. At least trial the bunker calling forward passes and having a word in the ear of the ref in general play if it is blatant. The critics will say 'what's blatant' and they are right but at least in general things will be fairer yet still controversial .
Nick
Roar Guru
Yup, agreed. It's genuinely not hard to put a digital line on the screen during a video review, and presto, you'll know straight away whether the ball went forward/backward, and then just a basic sighting at whether the hands were 'backwards'. It's really not that hard.
Gags
Guest
The issue with the refs is they are anything but consistent. So much so that that you could say, at different points in different games, they are biased
Boz
Guest
I query why they can rule on a knock on - but not on a forward pass with the video ref. Isn't it virtually the same thing - determining the path the ball has travelled? Seems very, dare I say, inconsistent.
Rob
Guest
The milking of penalties is a hard one and something the game will always have to contend with. I think a contrary conduct or taking the piss clause should be implemented at the discretion of the officials. If you deliberately do things like passing into defenders well behind the play or prone on the ground it’s play on. If you are deliberately loitering in the ruck or running between attacking players to cause interference it’s a penalty. Consistency in Rugby League is a pipe dream. Last weekend for instance the Cowboys lost due to a penalty for off side award after the drop goal missed. A few minutes earlier Morgan executed a successful drop goal whilst evading a defender arguably equally off side? Souths received a fair penalty the Cowboys didn’t. The Cowboys were good enough to score the 1 Souths were award 2 because they weren’t good enough? It’s like the Storm v Dragons no try but you can have a penalty. We are chasing our tails most weekends it’s luck of the draw.
Nick
Roar Guru
I hear you on the forward pass stuff. What annoys me is that this week there is a crackdown on forward passes which tells me two things 1. Having a crackdown blatantly means they have happily accepted not policing forward passes before and some are now so deliberately forward they can't ignore it anymore. 2. Crackdowns are temporary, which means in a week or two when the refs aren't cracking down on forward passes, the players will revert to the 40-50 forward passes per game that are never called up!
Macho
Guest
Impossible to take ref discretion out of that one (FP) but stripping the ball rule should go - if a player loses it in the tackle give it back to him . It rarely happened in the old days but suddenly it happens 10 times a game now with an inevitable game changing decision. 40% of penalties end in tries. Imagine a GF decided by a wrong stripping the ball call.
Forty Twenty
Guest
I'll start watching Super Rugby again if they start adjudicating scrums by the rule book as is been suggested. A penalty will need to be blown on just about every scrum. One ref will see a feed that's not in straight by a few inches and another will think it's too close to call. By following the rule book a whole lot more grey areas will come into play and it would be a farce. Some refs will penalise half of Cameron Smiths dummy half passes and half will think they are too close to call. Do you pull up a pass which you believe to be an inch forward or do you apply a bit of wisdom and acknowledge that it is too close to call? My consistent grudge this year has been the forward pass. I see blatant forward passes let go and marginal ones called up. I see these having a large bearing in some games on who wins. Manly x Roosters was a prime example. I have no idea on how they are going to rule on a pass and I'm craving for some sort of consistency. I'd be happy if they let all the marginal ones go or pulled them all up because if they are trying to follow the rule book it is just leading to heart ache for players and fans. The Roosters score off a forward pass against manly but Turbo throws one which is less forward and it's no try. My vote is for consistency even if both rulings are wrong.
jimmmy
Guest
Cudgel. I totally agree with the forward pass thing. All the short passes that look suss are. All of them are forward and it is almost Impossible to defend against them. If it looks suss pull it up. The knock on thing I am not so sure about . Don’t want to knock on , then don’t drop the ball. In a lot of cases it is neigh on impossible to tell which way the ball was propelled. You can have 10 people in a room and five say forward and five say back. I like the difficult ones always being pulled up. The onus should be on the player catching it to not nlooody well drop it. We are not AFL ( thank God ).
Macho
Guest
There's consistency - last night Klein? gave Broncs 5 penalties in a row and they got 2 scores in front and then 7 penalties straight to the struggling Eels. You didn't mention what the hell the rule is for stripping the ball/loose carry/2 in the tackle/ lost concentration/trying to offload/ etc. It can change a game yet the rule is impossible to enforce.
Albo
Guest
Spot on Cugel ! It is obvious that the rule book is just part of the NRL lucky dip process , to be at times adhered to strictly, or at other times ignored completely, at the officials' whim ! Best just ignore the individual events and outcomes and rely on the old " swings and roundabouts" principle to hopefully get your share of positive decisions over time.
Wayne Turner
Guest
Indeed. Shows how clueless Greenberg is.
Cugel
Roar Rookie
The everythings-a-knock-on rule is particularly odious, given how it works in concert with the nothings-a-forward-pass rule. And a couple of other irksome parings: Clear-the-ptb-at-all-costs but walk-off-the-mark-if-you-like Any-contact-contesting-a-bomb-is-a-penalty but runnings-into-chasers-is-not.
Nick
Roar Guru
More evidence that Gould is just a chop changing whinge. I've also seen him go ballistic when a pass has gone forward (the one in the Roosters v Manly game is still the most forward pass I've ever seen) and not been called. The best hypocrisy of Gould is that because he has his General Manager job at Penrith, he thinks he's NOT the media, so he feels free to slag the 'media' at every opportunity, while conveniently using his commentary gig, weekly spots on Channel 9 footy shows, his Channel 9 podcast and his pen to rag on everyone not in his obvious journalist role but in his 'sports administrator' role. The worst thing is he's such a bad influence on Andrew Johns. Johns now spends entire football games ripping into refs for disrupting 'the flow of the game' instead of providing us with his exceptional tactical insights.
The Barry
Roar Guru
He has...but you watch the increase in players lying around in the ruck making ham fisted attempts to get out of the way.
Sideline Commentator
Roar Guru
Greenburg has "launched a crackdown on time wasting" apparently, with penalties now to be awarded against the kind of shenanigans that Smith and Milford pulled. https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/05/21/nrl-launches-crackdown-on-time-wasting/