The thing in Rugby League that absolutely drives me crazy and is slowly but surely draining my interest in the game is the massive difference refereeing can have on the result of any/most games. A badly timed 50/50 penalty late in a set, late in a half when players are fatigued that marches a team straight into the red zone can and does turn matches.
Back in the old days with a leather ball (when this rule would have been set),a penalty kick for touch would travel a lot less distance than the balls of today. Changing the result of a penalty to a restart of the tackle count and a ten meter advantage rather than a kick for touch would still mean a penalty enforces an advantage without it necessarily completely changing the course of the game.
Tell me if you think I am way off here but I will reinforce that the number 1 issue I have with the game today is the ability of the twit in the middle with a whistle in his mouth to determine the result of a game.
Thoughts all?
Replies
Map : Agree 100% with your thinking. I have said in the past the the worst aspect of Rugby League is the refereeing. It has been that way since 1908. I have also said that when changing rules care must be taken that the referees can not use the new rules to determine the out come of a match--not an easy thing to do but necessary. Penalties have too much weight and do determine the outcome of matches. Your suggestion has merit but needs further consideration. If a team gets a penalty down in their 10 meter zone the present rule could still apply but otherwise your rule applies? I think the NRL should be mandated to review every match and if it is determined that the referee affected the out come then the winning team gets only one competition point. Thats under the existing system. Under your system my suggestion will not apply. I also think that the score board has the running totals of penalties on show at each game e.g. Penalties : Souths 8 , Eels 2 at the ten minute mark ! This would put public pressure on the referees to treat each side equally.
I'd like to see a half arm type penalty where it is just 6 again, for those ruck infringements and the like. Save the full penalty for fowl play etc. It would be hard to say what is half and what would be a full penalty at times, you could leave it up to the discretion of the ref if they were competent. When it is a loose carry and the team is then rewarded with a penalty, that shits me near to tears. Also when they award a penalty for laying on the player for a micro-second too long, when other similar tackles are let go, VERY FRUSTRATING. The half arm penalty would be more appropriate I think.
Teams be willing try bend the rules early in tackle count and could see a huge influx in penalties, attempts to strip the ball resulting in incorrect knock on calls and teams never back the 10.
No matter what the rules they will be exploited so have be careful when changing them if they will result in moving problem to another part of game.
1000% agree. The refs have far too much influence on the outcome of the game. Happens in almost every game I watch.
How often do we see tries come on the back of a piggy back penalty? I reckon the statistics would be alarming.
Exactly! Reducing the magnitude of the effect that a poor decision from a ref has can only be a good thing. Bringing it back into line with what an average kick for touch may have gained back in the day with a heavy leather ball (10-20 meters) reduces the amount a whistle happy ref can ruin a game.
Alternatively, maybe they can toss the kicker an old leather ball to have their kick for touch?
Toddy ensures the refs decide who wins in most cases.
Believe it or not...nothing new here.
Who will the fairytale be THIS year?
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next