Have we ever had a worse rule in rugby league?
Have we ever had a worse rule in rugby league?
I think it's a cop-out for the refs. When there is a penalty, fans have a pretty good idea why the penalty was given. The amount of times a ref has given 6 again and I'm not sure why it's been given and then there's been moments when I've thought that must be a 6 again and nothing is given.
The idea behind the rule is good, I think the way it's been reffed has completely messed it up. They should either get rid of it altogether or have it that the captain is allowed to signal they don't want a 6 again but a penalty instead.
Supposed to make the game quicker but rewarding the offending side by not giving any Feild position to the opposition. We’d see less penalties if you were at risk of being pushed 30-40m closer to your own line with a kick to touch.
We had an instance yesterday where ball was kicked dead, a 7 tackle set on the 20, player held down on first, then ref called a six again. Which really should have been 7 again. Teams are exploiting and slowing teams down on tackle 1 and 2. The killer is tackle 4 or 5. It could be a penalty on tackle 1/2/3 with a kick to touch with a set restart on 4/5/6 to keep the game quicker.
Perfectly good rule to keep the flow of the game moving.
Imported from the NRL (and how many times have we complained that the same game has different rules in different competitions?).
Coaches have used cynical tactics to use the rule to the benefit of the offending team. The NRL have spotted this and amended the rule so 6 again is only called when the ball is outside the attacking team's 40 meters. Otherwise it's a penalty.
Give it another six or seven years and the RFL will cotton on.
As for the referees' consistency in interpretation, well that's a different matter...
Lomax gets tackled , we have quick play of the ball, but Lomax is held down THEN Sneyd flops on top. Think we only get a 6 again but it should have been a penalty.
I get it if a player is held down a bit to long or a bit of messing round in the tackle, but stuff like that should result in a penalty.
How many penalty's have you seen given for a late flop this season. Seems to have become a thing of the past.
Loyal and true, not a glory hunter.
As mentioned above, the NRL version is probably the best balance where you receive a penalty in your own 40 and a 6 again if it's out of there.
Doesn't seem right you can get a 6 again on your own line then knock on next play etc and they've got the field position.
The Sneyd one was ridiculous but the ref gave the right call, he's just following the rules.
I am in favour of it, but it needs modifying like the NRL have done when it is given for you in your own half. It is not enough of a deterrent on tackle 1 when you have the other team on their own line.
However, I would also be in favour of giving it its own signal as it is a little confusing. When the ref gives six again people sometimes around me say 'what happened then? It must have hit the other team' as the hooter is not always used.
Please can we also ask the refs to stop shouting 'you are too slow six again' in the most sarcastic, smug and patronising tone.
I thought I liked it when pressing opposition line and get slowed down on last tackle.... virtually a repeat set but flip side on Saturday, Lomax on tackle 1 coming out from our line, tackled and held on then Sneyd comes in as Lomax gaining his feet! 6 again but no real advantage to Saints.
It was brought in to lower the bar on what was to be deemed a slowing of the PTB (due to Covid, of course), without having to give a load of penalties.
As you say, though, it was quickly 'sussed out' by coaches. I'd scrap it full stop to return to giving penalties - but with a much stricter enforcement and shortened time for the tackle to be completed and defenders to clear the ruck.
He's not the Messiah, he's a naughty boy.
It is hard for teams because ref's apply ruck speed and what should/should not be penalised very differently and some refs are too easily pressured into giving them by the home crowd.
My rule would be that if the attacker 'wins' the tackle and fall on his front, any delay to clear should be penalised. Conversely, any tackler who is dominated, the defenders should be able to hold down for an extra couple of seconds. I am not sure how else you can bring in a black and white rule that will be used the same in every game. Its kinda like the surrender call but I would just scrap that.
If it is tackle 1 or 2 penalty +10 meters + kick to touch. In itself gets you out of your half and out of trouble, they would soon stop doing it.
If they absolutely must keep some version of it then I would go for the NRL idea where it only comes into play outside your own 40. But given the choice I would just get rid of it altogether. First of all, I don't think another layer of complexity in the rules is helpful, and secondly I don't really see what purpose it serves. It was brought in to speed the game up, and for a while it worked, but for quite a while now it has been having precisely the opposite effect.
Forwards win games. The backs decide by how much.
You can blame the teams and you could punish them
Remember the team warnings we had a few seasons ago, simply if a team repeatedly offends, ref issues a team warning and next time the player gets a yellow card.
No point in bringing rules in to speed up the game if we let teams deliberately flout them
Scrap it and return to a penalty. Plus kicking practice so a penalty hurts the offending team by losing 40m of ground. That's 5 tackles worth of ground lost on average which increases the attacking team's chances of scoring hugely. Boils my •••• kicking it 10m over the line but to the back of row z.
Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk