Even though they are bringing the Hodges try up I am backing this is more directly aimed at putting pressure on the Video Referee on the Hasler/Bulldogs obstruction plays. I don't see the big deal, bodies in motion and quality passing and no one ever actually gets obstructed they just get confused which is the beauty of those plays when they are done well.
The ref interpretations are the problem IMO and Harrigan won't admit there is a problem with the wording.
Take b) for instance, once a ball runner runs behind another player and causes the defender to misread that is an advantage.
It makes no reference to obstruction or decoys runners or anything else, so the question becomes, what is an advantage?
What is or or is not an advantage is not defined, IMO a misread caused by running behind your team mate is an advantage, others see it differently.
a) It is the responsibility of the decoy runner/s not to interfere with the defending team. b) The ball runner cannot run behind his own team and gain an advantage.
c) A sweep player may receive the ball on the inside of a block runner as long as there
is depth on the pass to him. It there is no depth he needs to receive the ball on the
outside of the block runner.
d) Defensive decisions that commit defenders to decoy runners will not be considered
e) Attacking players who loiter next to the play the ball can be interpreted as
obstructing the defending team.
f) In the process of scoring a try an attacking player dives through or into the legs of
the player who has played the ball a penalty will be awarded to the defending team.
This action will be interpreted as obstruction.
g) If in the opinion of the referee/video referee the play had no effect on the
scoring of the try the try will be awarded.
So have I Coxy, but if you apply the refs guidelines as they are written then in most cases you wouldn't get past b). The play would not pass that guideline but when you read that guideline in conjunction with d) and g) that is where the confusion is happening.