At Monday’s Round 17 weekly review, NRL Head of Elite Football Competitions Graham Annesley tested the winds and launched a kite high into the air.
“At the end of the year we have got the Competition Committee meeting again and one of things that I think we need to spend a fair bit of time on is examining our current rules and whether we can actually make the game easier to officiate,” Annesley said.
Far as thought bubbles go, it’s a doozy. The NRL’s ‘Laws and Interpretations 2019’ document runs only 19 pages and a bunch of those pages are only half filled with text.
The AFL’s rules of the game document is 70 pages long. Rugby Australia’s is 168 pages long. The point here is that calling a rugby league game is already a pretty straightforward outing for referees.
The examples Annesley raised were whether knock ons in aerial contests should be called or let go as a ‘bobble’, and double movements in scoring a try.
These are supposedly pedantic rules that make the game harder to referee. I would have thought that knock ons were kind of non-negotiable, either the ball is knocked forward or it isn’t. Right?
Why stop at letting knock ons go in aerial contests? Let it happen around the ground. Plenty of times the ball is lost in a tackle and regathered before hitting the ground, but knock-on is called.
On the other hand, I can live without the double movement rule. There’s been some borderline comedic situations where a player is trying to defy the laws of physics and gravity to stop himself doing a double movement.
Graham Annesley. (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)
If it’s good enough for union to let a player fight to the line, it’s good enough for league.
But if players can now crawl themselves to the line to score, will they be penalised for trying to score a few extra metres in general play? And if the plan is to make things easier, why limit changes to try scoring?
Part of this thinking is to cut back on time spent making decisions. It’s been mentioned a few times throughout the year that the NRL want less ‘dead time’, with faster bunker decisions and general cleanups in timekeeping. The ball is in play for around 55 of the 80 minutes on the clock.
There’s a simple way to bump that number up. Stop the clock for penalties. Don’t run the clock down for conversions or penalty kicks. In fact, stop the clock whenever the ball goes out of bounds.
But I’m getting off topic.
Simplicity of the rules is an honourable enough goal, but it still doesn’t tackle one of rugby league’s biggest problems – the #refsfault culture and disrespect for match officials that the NRL have well and truly let spiral out of control.
I’ve asked this quite a few times now, and I’ll ask it again. Is there a sporting league on earth that treats its referees with such little respect as rugby league does?
From junior league crowds all the way to the NRL CEO, scapegoating the referee is second nature. It really is an unedifying feature of a great game.
NRL commentators regularly spend their broadcasts complaining about referees and decisions, whether the broadcaster is right or not. A lot of the time the complaint is from a former player who either doesn’t know the rules, or just doesn’t like them being enforced.
For them, it’s all about the mythical, magical ‘flow’ to a game that is so, so important to the Channel Nine commentary team, but has still never actually been explained to anyone.
Ref bashing is endemic in the game’s culture and for the most part NRL head office stands pat, doing bugger all to stand up for their employees as people rip in from all angles.
To be fair, Annesley has stood up for the referees compared to most in the last few years. Previous referee’s boss Tony Archer seemed to relish highlighting errors for the media. I can’t remember one instance of him protecting his crew of defending a referee – for him, they were human shields.
Head office should be publicly standing by their officials no matter what. Support or defend, it doesn’t matter. It just needs to happen more to send the message that referees are being looked after.
George Burgess being replaced on report. (Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
The NRL are still willing to publicly hang their match officials to appease the loudest voices, because they’re terrified Phil Gould and Buzz Rothfield will say mean things about them.
Ref’s faulting has come back into vogue over the last month or so. And if the NRL briefing for referees was that they can pick and choose what rules to apply to protect the ‘flow’, what did they think was going to happen?
Imagine Ashley Klein goes to his weekly review and is questioned on a non-call. If he says “I didn’t think it was worth calling, it would have stopped the flow,” what’s the discipline? Klein’s acted in line wth his instructions.
For the good Annesley is doing with his weekly briefings, he pretty much forfeited the right to talk about ‘sloppy’ refereeing performances the instant he and Greenberg told the crew that some rules were more important than others.
It would appear the mooted rule change discussion is going to happen, because Annesley doesn’t go out and float an idea that big without telling anyone.
Is it really necessary though?
Gus O
Roar Rookie
Do you need me to refer you to a dictionary for the meaning of “hypocrisy”? Still pathetic champ.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
I don't see any reason why we need rule changes. The issue, to me, is that referees are trying to manage a game and not referee it. Look at last night when a player was taken out illegally while trying to score a try. Penalty try at worse but a definite sin bin. The impression is that referees want, or are told, to keep 26 players on the field regardless. The rules are there to be used but the referees aren't using them.
Insider
Roar Rookie
Tosh ! Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
David
Guest
At first I thought your statement was utter tosh. After all, the right to be treated with respect, I would've thought, was an inalienable human right. But then I remembered that you capitalised most of your sentence so, you win.
Nick
Roar Guru
OH - rush me to the burn unit with that retort. Maybe you do a bit of research before posting next time, chief.
Insider
Roar Rookie
David , yes EVERYONE HAS TO EARN RESPECT, even refs
David
Guest
"you earn respect"? I hope you're not talking about the referees. When was the last time a referee acted disrespectfully towards the players or fans. Respect isn't contingent upon somebody's ability as a referee.
gregjm
Guest
NRL laws and interpretations IS NOT the only rule book of the NRL. It is only a supporting document to the RFL laws of the game a 100+ page document which referees are REQUIRED to know inside out. The NRL laws and interpretations is used only where some rules are modified in NRL compared to what the actual rule is. The best example of this (which i recently posted in another thread) is the rule book says you must use your foot to play the ball, the NRL interpretation says only a genuine attempt is needed. To think our game only has 19 pages of rules shows complete ignorance of the game. I used to think that referee press conferences would be good for the game. In some (many) cases it might show the average punter why they are wrong. Why wasnt he allowed that quick tap? Thats more exciting for the game than this committee meeting before making a decision? The mark hadnt been given, the rules (the actual rules not the 19 page document) states the mark must be communicated both verbally and non-verbally, he tried to tap it before the mark had been given which he is not entitled to do. Unfortunately i had to pull him back. It would also, for better or worse, allow a ref to admit a mistake. But what really will be achieved by a ref saying i thought he lost it forward but upon seeing the replay i can see now he actually lost it backwards. Nothing will be gained, the result is already determined. Refs are human, they are going to make mistakes in a fast paced game. This is why I would like a captains challenge, at least that way some of the blame will be off the refs and onto the players for "wasting their challenge" if they lose a match through a referee howler. But this as well is not without its potential issues. There is such a fine line between some things such as a loose carry and a strip (example Wighton losing the ball when Addo-Carr picked up and scored in the corner, there was a stripping motion AND it was a loose carry) does the rule then just be stick with the onfield decision? Having said all that i think the refereeing has been overall pretty good until the past month. The past month has been poor, cant identify a reason for the past month being poor though. And i think the no knock on til the ball hits the ground rule could be interesting but will ultimately change nothing.
Lozza101
Roar Rookie
The knock-on rule has become a real frustration, with just about any dropped ball being deemed a knock-on. Refs are under fire, rightly, as they don't seem to understand the rule...at least that's the impression they give to the audience with poor decisions about this occurring every weekend in every game. I don't have issue with the double movement, I believe they get that one right far more often than not. But knock-ons seem to be gotten wrong more often than right. Scrums...what a waste of time! Revert back to scrums being formed to compete for the ball or just get rid of them completely. They won't throw the ball in from the sideline as Union does that, and they won't bounce the ball or throw it up as Aussie Rules does that. So we have this stupid facade of a scrum whereby you don't compete for the ball...well, just hand the ball over to the other side, as it amounts to the same thing anyway! And get more ex-players involved with decision making and rule making rather than wannabe beureucrats that never played, or were never picked to play when they were at school. That alone is a huge problem.
terrykidd
Roar Pro
"If it’s good enough for union to let a player fight to the line, it’s good enough for league. But if players can now crawl themselves to the line to score, will they be penalised for trying to score a few extra metres in general play? And if the plan is to make things easier, why limit changes to try scoring?" Your statement here is incorrect. In rugby union a player cannot "crawl to the line" ..... its the same as Rugby League if a player is held in the tackle then the tackled player cannot promote forward movement. In rugby union a tackled player can place the ball in any direction when tackled .... so might be stopped short of the line but can then reach forward and place the ball on, or over, the line to score a try. In fact, in neither game can a player promote forward movement once tackled and held in the tackle. Its simply up to the refs to police it an nothing that Annesley is kite flying about will improve the current situation.
Insider
Roar Rookie
The refs in 10 pin are shocking
Gus O
Roar Rookie
Ok champ, you call me ignorant while proclaiming that allowing their refs to be mobbed and abused by players on the field in a manner that had Klemmer and Graham suspended shows support for their refs. You’ve badly missed the point pal, and your rude response is pathetic.
Insider
Roar Rookie
With all due respect Gray-Hand I won’t engage or comment on anything you post, your condescending way is very offensive
Winnie the Pooh (Emperor of China)
Guest
Any word on making the scrum legitimate again? Cannot believe this farce is being over-looked. So much for NRL being a tough man game. Pussy game more like it. No more place kicking too, make the shot at goal from a drop kick or even punt. It speeds up play. Do we really need a limit on tackles, it would be a better game without the artificially forced handover of the ball after 6 tackles. A limit on advertising on jerseys would be nice too. Roll it back from twenty or thirty to a more moderate 5.
farkurnell
Guest
There are 3 things certain in life - Death,Taxes & NRL ref abuse.If you dont like ref 50/50 calls go watch Ten Pin Bowling - no refs there,but gets a bit boring.
Nick
Roar Guru
@Gus You've badly missed the point. Yes, Euro football crowds and media hound referees worse than our media and fan base in the NRL. BUT...what you've ignorantly overlooked is that the FA, La Liga, UEFA etc etc will defend their referees in front of the media. In other words, they defend their employees. The NRL on the other hand...Greenberg drives the bus while annesley chucks the refs under it. That's the fundamental difference. NRL refs receive absolutely no backing from their employer.
Insider
Roar Rookie
Well maybe (except for AFL) the standards are higher
Paul
Roar Guru
there is a massive difference between being an adjudicator for a set of rules already agreed by everyone prior to a match starting and a bloke having the front the media where there are NO rules and certainly none a ref might either agree to or understand. In any event, as others have rightly pointed out, why is Rugby League the only sport where this sort of idea is even considered?
Gray-Hand
Roar Rookie
What is the call of a referee, but an opinion?
Melburnian
Roar Pro
To be fair, if you take out the variations and the definitions, Union's laws run to 85 pages in a pocket sized binding. but I take the point.