I'm not sure if this is a correct assumption in terms of the 10 metre rule but IF all the player's in the defending team are not back in line with the referee when the attacking team is about to play the ball then isnt the defending team then offside? What about the 2 oppossing players marking those playing the ball ? When are they supposedly allowed to move off there marking position? It appears (and I could be right off track here) that there are lots of teams and players getting away with both of these rules, in particular being inside the 10 metres and in front of the referee. In many instances the referee appears to see it but refuses to enforce the rule. Has anybody else noticed this? Or is it just me?
You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
Replies
The refs have made a rule that they want a faster game and to not worry about the incidentals. Or words to that affect, likewise they are happy when the whistles are not blown, especially when it might help non desired teams.
Thats ridiculous really as arent rules there to be enforced and to make the game more competitive and give those sides that arent highly favoured some opportunities against the stronger teams that just happen to not adhere to the rules more frequently. I mean whats the point of having rules if theyre not going to be followed? It might as well be "Rafferties Rules"!
Rules aren’t there to be enforced, they are guidelines, nothing more.
Thats ridiculous Brett! So driving 100klm an hour on the highway is only a guideline? Throwing a forward pass is only a guideline? Trafficking drugs is only a guideline! No rules and the absence of enforcing those rules equals anarchy. If the referees don't enforce the rules then they might as well throw them in the garbage.
You're comparing a rule designed to save lives to a game of footy. That's incredibly stupid even by your standards Monto.
The rules of the game aren't there just to be enforced. If players are making a genuine effort to get back the ten, then I have no problem with the ref letting the play go if they only get back 8 and a half metres. If a team makes a break into the backfield and the last pass happens to be 6 inches forward and no real advantage was gained, let it go.
The rules aren't there for their own sake, they are there as a framework for referees to make discretionary decisions.
Classic case in point was the ridiculous No Try ruling from the Bunker on Sunday that robbed Manly of a fair try, all because the ballplayer received the ball a foot inside the lead runners shoulder and was behind him. No defender was impeded because the ballplayer was sufficiently deep to give the defence plenty of time to adjust, indeed Manu M'au still had a clean shot on the Manly player anyway and came up with fresh air.
It was the right call according to the rule book, but anyone who knows anything about the game knew that it was a fair try.
A classic example of a rule being a guideline only, and not a black and white situation.
Rules are rules Brett. I only used other examples and yes, theyre totally different than a game of football rules but nevertheless, rules are to be enforced. If a player is "offside" then hes offside even if by 1/2 a metre its still offside and its the referees job to adhere to the rules and enforce them. If they cannot be enforced then dont have them or make rules that can be adhered to so that the games is fair for every team and player.
No, the rules of Rugby League are only ever intended to be guidelines because you can't make black & white rules. No set of rules will ever adequately cover every possible scenario that might present itself during the course of a game. Rules by their very nature must have flexibility to suit different scenarios.
Rules of any sport are put in place to prevent teams from gaining an unfair advantage. They are a framework for officials to base their decision making on. If a player standing on the side of the field isn't the full ten metres back his team has gained no advantage.
That is the point of the rules, to prevent the gaining of unfair advantage. If no advantage has been gained, let it go, let the players sort it out.
The other point is that many times teams intentionally give away penalties particularly when defending their own line because it disrupts the attacking teams flow.
Leave the ball in play, bring fatigue back into the equation and let the players figure it out. Only blow a penalty when absolutely necessary.
The best game are the ones where the refs don't blow the whistle. Have a look at Origin 3. The first half was practically unwatchable because the refs blew a penalty every 3 or 4 minutes, the second half they put their whistles away and it was close to the best 40 minutes of footy this season.
No disrespect intended here Brett, but I’m guessing you’ve never played league?
When I played we were coached to see what we “could get away with” in the first 5 sets. How long we could hold down, how much we could creep inside the 10 etc. If it wasn’t penalised we did it more and more and fatigue wasn’t a factor because the 10 metres became 6 and the longer hold downs meant we had more time to get a breather. The storm do this better than any team.
As a player, I was over the moon when there was no penalties because it made my job as a forward so much easier.
Point being if they don’t blow the whistle then players will slow it down themselves. The 2nd half of origin 3 was great because the refs set the standard in the first half.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next