And the Oscar goes to...

Well said. only you missed a few names Anthony Millkford and Darrius Boyed thank goodness he is retired. flapping his arms like a red bull. The other thing plying for a quick play as receiver after the tackle. Just play the game.

You could use a captains challenge for high tackles. This would stop players lying down.

Okay, some apologies, I misinterpreted the Dr. And here you are correct, but a ref doesn't need to be a doctor to ascertain some levels of potential injury. I'm no doctor, but if I'm playing or reffing and a guy's ankle is at a weird angle, I'm getting him off for medial assessment. If a guy drops like a stone after being hit, rubbing neck or jaw - If I'm ref and about to penalise for a illegal or rough shot, I want that bloke to be properly medically assessed before he spends more time on the field. I don't want to be looking over a paraplegic who I let stay on the field after a 'crusher' tackle that gave him enough pain to be wincing and rubbing and reacting as if he's in a lot of pain.

:laughing:

That's how he was taught. Any ouchy - hold the neck...

In the old days a dive would result in a good clip over the ears by other players in the next scrum or tackle. Take that self-regulation out and we are where we are now. Perhaps the match review could start fining diving.

Another good read LL. Keep it up! There's enough pretenders in the NRL without adding actors to the mix.

Hold on... you have gone from a medical decision to someone 'doing a Radley'. Big difference. What I said is it is not the Refs job to be a DR and I reject your raise as it has no basis in the 1st point you made. On the officiating is easy, I agree except for the result of a disagreed decision, NOT a right or wrong call, just simply disagreed. 40 years ago the Ref was always right, was called sir and you did not dispute. Now with all the cameras, social media and the always 180 degrees the other way (see me doing quote marks with my fingers) journalists, officating has become massively difficult, UNLESS you are similar to Bill Harrigan - he simply did not give a F for anyone elses thoughts (well that was the impression he gave).

The rewards for acting are now so much higher with sin bin offences having a very low bar. There were a couple of instances on the weekend where the high shot was missed in play and was only picked up when the player (who was unhurt) stopped and rubbed their jaw. The NRL can’t complain about this because they want all high shots to be punished.

Agreed. I'm just saying we don't need a rule review, refs can already handle it within their purview.

EW, the others (who's job you say it is) are doing a right ballsup job of it. They are complicating and stuffing things up with their unnecessary tweaks, their motivation (not what's necessary on the park in the game but for appearance) and approach. Plus, it IS the ref's job to officiate and taking some overseeing over the running of the game - NOT entertainment management - IS part of their role. By your reasoning a guy who is going mental, swinging lethal head shots at almost every tackle - but missing - you'd keep on because he hasn't hit anyone so it's not illegal. Instead of recognising the potential danger and acting on it? The ref leaves it for match review committee and doesn't act?? The only thing we agree on is that ref's have a tough job. But it's tough because they don't get the right support, officiating isn't really that hard when done right. Ref rules on more than what is legal or not, they rule on the rules and what I'm talking about is part of that. I return your disagree and raise.

That's my point DPS. If a player starts rubbing his neck or is slow to move, get him off. It was interesting listening to what Justin Holbrook said that in the Super League when he was there when players started laying down the coaches and hierarchy of the Super League got together and decided they didn't want to go down the path of the Premier league with all its diving. Anyway, problem was solved.

Could not disagree with you more..... It is not the Refs job to be a DR. Ref rules on whether it was illegal or not, thats it! And that is hard enough to do even with all the cameras we have. There are 100s of other reasons why its not the Ref, but that one alone will do me.

There's no doubt players acting injured to score their team a penalty is a blight on the game. The problem is, they make it tough on those players who stay down because they are genuinely hurt. LL made the point that some perfectly legal and often innocuous tackles can result in an injury. On more than one occasion, I've seen guys lying prone while the tackler stands over them screaming for the player to get up and stop acting. The other question is, do we just want to stop the acting when it comes to high shots, or to illegal play in general? Remember the dive DCE took earlier in the season when he brushed against Latrell Mitchell, resulting in Mitchell being binned? If the NRL's fair dinkum, they need to do two things. One, on match day, is to give the "injured" player a spell on the sidelines, for either 5 or 10 minutes, depending on the type of injury they've supposedly sustained. The incident itself needs to be put on report and the match review committee needs to consider whether there was a dive, which is bringing the game into disrepute. If so, suspend the player and fine the Club heavily. The fine is an inducement to get Clubs to educate their players that taking a dive might be okay in other sports, but not in Rugby League

The thing is, you shouldn't need to tweak the rules. The ref has - and always has had, discretionary powers. eg. in the safety/spirit/best interests of a person or the game. ie. Fred gets a compound fracture in the forearm, part of the bone is sticking out or the joint at a ridiculous angle. And wants to keep playing. Ref is within his rights to refuse and insist he leaves the field for medical treatment. That's extreme, yes, but in the same way if a guy drops like he's been shot and 'appears' or 'acts up' something serious the ref can - by duty of care - insist he goes off for treatment - or the mandatory 10/15 minute HIA.. equally, if a guy is losing it and starting to be over emotional and aggressive ref can do same - insist he is replaced or send him off for the safety of others. Don't need all this hoo haa, just support the refs doing their job to the best of their ability.

Couldn't agree more. As a Parra fan I hate it when he does that. Not just because he is supposedly a hard guy and he obviously isn't hurt, but also because it absolutely kills any potential momentum the team may have gained from his run. The whole level injury thing is a tough one for me, but I do think the perceived intent behind the tackle is more important that the effect on the player. If a player comes in with a text book swinging arm, fist clenched and hits someone in the head but no damage is done, it still should be punished a lot harder than the lazy arm that causes more damage, or an accidental high shot on a falling player.

Sivo's a classic. If only someone would tell him not to hold the back of his neck when its actually been his knee that was injured.

Milking penalties is getting worse LL, it's a scourge on the game. One solution would be to send the tackled player from the field for 10 minutes, straight away. See how many of these milkers miraculously appear ok. These milkers are losing the respect of the fans, no matter what team they play for.

Maika Sivo, If there were penalties, sin bins and send offs for milking his 1st grade career would be over today ! But to be fair, players stay down when hit high not because its a KO but because the response from on field officials and the bunker is so random. If a high shot is a penalty then its a penalty, the severity of the injury should only impact on the question of on report, sin bin or send off.