More than halfway through the regular season and the referee crackdown continues. I know this because the Channel Nine commentary team are still banging on about it for half of every game.
There is a feeling that rather than pushing their own barrow throughout our viewing experience, they really should start talking a bit more about the game in front of them if they want the viewers’ experience to go beyond ‘I watch Nine because I don’t have Foxtel’, but at some point after the horse had been flogged into a bloody pulp, I considered their point (yes, thereby justifying their persistence).
The issues as I see them are, firstly, that teams are giving away professional fouls in order to slow play and set their defence. The logic is that they’d rather defend a full set after a breather and with an organised line rather than a couple of tackles without either. Teams have also been creeping up offside, playing on the refs’ willingness to penalise and their preference to let things flow.
In response, we have seen the ‘crackdown’. While many applaud the consistent enforcing of the rules, the complaint is it prevents fatigue entering the game and rewards the defence by turning the situation to one that suits them rather than the attacking team. The situation is at its peak on the goal-line, where risk from disorganisation is higher but organisation has a greater benefit due to fullbacks playing in the line and the full 10 metres not being required.
Given this, the temptation of two guaranteed points is too high in most cases and so we get a minute’s break while there’s a shot for goal, which exacerbates the issue.
Finally, the big stick the refs have is to send someone to the bin, and we then see players strolling off the field at a comically slow pace, allowing their mates to be nice and fresh.
[latest_videos_strip category=”rugby-league” name=”League”]
So what are we to do? The game must enforce its rules, but we all want to see the type of free-running and skilful tries that occur when defences get tired and disorganised.
So how can we keep consequence for breaking the rules while minimising stoppages and keeping the flow of the game so fatigue is still a factor?
Firstly, the warning.
For minor indiscretions like minimal offsides, laying in the ruck a little too long, hands on the ball etc, the ref calls out “Warning – offside” (or whatever is relevant).
A team gets one warning (for any reason) in a set and the second one gets penalised. This will get rid of the penalties for little mistakes while maintaining a consequence and a motivation to try to do it right.
I’d retain the right of the refs to penalise particularly blatant breaking of the rules.
Secondly, introduce play the ball restarts if we can’t have quick taps.
The reason we can’t have quick taps for every penalty is that refs feel there is an issue for ten-metre offside penalties and penalties within ten metres of the tryline.
Whether the reason is because the defence is too disadvantaged being around the advantage line or the refs can’t get organised to police the new offside line, the upshot is it’s about not having enough time. The simple fix is to allow a zero-tackle play of the ball restart immediately after the mark is given for all penalties.
The slightly more time taken to play the ball would be enough to solve the problem, while allowing the flow to continue every time.
Crazy Dave
Guest
I don't watch that much Union. My knowledge/belief/understanding that there is such a signal comes from the Fox Commentators of League...
Damascus
Guest
And of course we cant have sin bins because that would ruin the chance of a close game
Macho
Guest
Additionally the most interest in the game is when a team is attacking the opponents goal line so if this can happen more then all the better for TV viewers
macho
Guest
The fact that referees refuse to give advantage with these penalties within 10 metres of the goaline supports the theory that the plan (sometimes) is to stop a leading team scoring potentially 6 points and making it more than a one score game (play the ball infringement happened b4 the ball came back into play? - so what!) - the less than one score game being the TV holy grail for maximum interest from the marginally interested. The fact that they are not allowed to take quick taps within 10 metres lends support to this view. They couldn't just pick out these penalties for winning teams attacking so hence a plethora of penalties. The same doesn't seem to apply for golden point drop kickathons. Previous RL chiefs have always gone on about how close RL games are (as a counter to blowouts in RU and AFL) so one is always mindful of rule interpretation changes. It will be interesting to see if this quirk applies in SOO.
Benn
Guest
That will be a deterrent at the start but how do you manage the end? What about after taking a shot at 2 points the team gets a drop out aswell.
in brief
Guest
I was an avid league follower back in the 80s and one thing that frustrates me today is the lack of detail. The quick tap is a classic example. In theory the ball has to leave the hand - this is enforced in rugby union. In rugby league the ball often doesn't even touch the boot. Players just hold the ball out and run. it looks so damn ridiculous and I normally switch off at this point. The bigger issue for league is defining what it wants to be. The NRL has really bastardised the game to meet commercial pressures without any consultation with super league or the IRFL and what you get today is the result - a dog's breakfast.
In Brief
Guest
The referee is rugby generally give a clear warning that the next infringement will lead to a yellow card. It is a verbal signal.
Rugby Union Fan
Guest
@Crazy Dave I’ve been watching union for a long time and have never seen any signal indicating a player will be sent to the bin on the next infringement. If you could enlighten me of what it is, that would be great.
Crazy Dave
Guest
I want to see the Refs continue to uphold the laws of the game. If that means players get sent to the bin, then so be it. Commit the crime, do the time. As to the Captain's Warning... scrap it... Rugby Union have a signal which the Ref makes to indicate that the next infringement will result in a player being sent to the sin bin. Why can't we have the same? And, bring in a rule that gives players who are sent to the sin bin a certain amount of time to get over the nearest boundary, even if that means walking half way round the boundary to get back to their bench. If they don't get over the sideline in that timeframe, every extra second that it takes them to get off the field is added to their original 10 minutes.
Peter Phelps
Guest
The problem with these deliberate infringements is that the penalty for getting caught is less than the benefit gained from the practice. What we have to do is make them hurt. The 3rd penalty in a row in the 20 metre zone, automatic sin bin. The 3rd penalty in a row within 5 metres of the tryline should be an automatic penalty try. 2 penalty tries awarded in a game should be an automatic send off. I would also introduce some form of Captains challenge to ensure that someone is policing the refs over this.
Matt
Guest
What would you do if they didn't have an interchange left though?
soapit
Guest
i do blame the players, they just dont seem to be changing in response so i want to maintain the consequence while somehow minimising spoiling the games flow
soapit
Guest
SP, in case its not clear the play was to be only an option, the other options would remain as they are. you could still kick for touch from anywhere and i agree they would definitely do that near their own goal line it was just away of giving a quick restart option in situations where you currently arent allowed to.
Sports Prophet
Roar Pro
C’mon Womblat, use your brain. If players don’t break the rules, they won’t be penalised or be sent to the bin. My first paragraph refers to the article if you read it. The author suggests penalties be restarted with a play the ball. I’m suggesting that any person with half a brain would prefer to kick for touch if rewarded with a penalty only ten metres off their own goal line. Maybe you have less than half a brain...
Bruce
Guest
Allow ref's to play an advantage for the full set, then go back to infringement if no advantage gained. Re start after a sin bin once player is out of way, not just off the field, if he is stupid enough to get involved then automatic send off. If the game is stop/start because of penalties, blame the PLAYERS, not the ref, they are they ones pushing the laws.
Mike from Tari
Guest
Just keep penalising any infringement, no warnings, if the refs bins them on the 2nd or 3rd infringement tough luck, if you can't keep the 10 or your foot on the try line or your hand off the ball in the play the ball or you can't get off the tackled player in time, then your just plain stupid & should be binned.
Concerned Obsever
Guest
The sin bin in its current state is not enough of a deterrent for the cynical play shown by teams. I’ve already mentioned my shot-clock idea for players getting off the field but that only denies the team a rest. Let’s make it a much greater punishment. When a player gets sin binned an interchange should be lost as well. This disrupts the rotations and denies the forwards a rest. That way, a teams can no longer just cynically give away penalties with the worst case scenario being a player down, this gives each sin-bin lasting consequences for the game. People will argue about it having too much impact but team’s shouldn’t be playing this cynically in the first place
Concerned Obsever
Guest
I know right? No one wants to watch teams be decimated by the sin bin, if only there were something the teams could do to stop that? Anyway, can’t put my finger on it, must be one of those higher mysteries that we’ll never know the answer to, like the after life or why on Earth you would think the ref’s are the problem if a team’s discipline is so appalling it loses 3 men to the bin. As for the warning, think he’s referring to the big show of the ref pulling the captain aside and giving them a big old speech while the Captain talks about how everyone else is doing it. It wastes time and makes for atrocious viewing, I would much rather the sin bin be cracked out whenever the Ref feels appropriate And finally, I find it intensely disrepectful and ridiculous when players take their sweet time to get off the field when they’re binned. Your team does not deserve an extended break because you’ve committed a foul worthy of being taken off. A ten second shot clock would work, exceed it and the offending player can have the rest of the game off too. Extreme, and definitely needs to account for injuries but the game should not be held up for the players who do not respect it
Paul
Roar Guru
Surly we're past the stage of telling highly paid professionals to stop breaking the rules, through a warning? All the refs are doing us stating the bleeding obvious and giving the team commiting the indiscretions to have another spell while captain tells his players to stop - which they shouldn't have been doing in the first place. Repeat offences starts after the second penalty and from that point onward, why can't a player be binned? No warnings, just get them off. I'm also at a loss to understand how Rugby union can get the penalty advantage rule right and League cannot? The NRL has all sorts of excuses why players are stopped from playing on, but maybe they should simplify the rules, if that's what's holding back a quick tap.
mushi
Roar Guru
Yep for the offside one it would be hard not to see this just being a snow ball effect as surely your hooker can run forward faster than the entire middle defensive line can run backwards, so either they have to stay out of the play and just let him run past them or commit a penalty. Agree on the within 10m tap though, always loved those sneaky darts from the hookers/halves.