NRL Rules Discussion

[Kimlo]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

So where is the rule on separation?

 

[Dexter]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

This is the only reference I can find to separation, it's in the refs guidelines only (unless I am missing something) interesting that the refs guidelines also say the ball can be placed with hands or arm which is different to the laws of the game.


The ball must be placed on the ground with hand/s or arm.
If separation occurs during grounding of the ball for a try possession can be regained by the
hand or arm regaining contact with the ball prior to it hitting the ground.

 

[jarro65]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

This is the only reference I can find to separation, it's in the refs guidelines only (unless I am missing something) interesting that the refs guidelines also say the ball can be placed with hands or arm which is different to the laws of the game.


The ball must be placed on the ground with hand/s or arm.
If separation occurs during grounding of the ball for a try possession can be regained by the
hand or arm regaining contact with the ball prior to it hitting the ground.

So going by that interpretation then, Slater did score a legit try last night.

I really don't like that rule .... Slater deadset lost control of that ball and just jammed it against the ground.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

Are you really going to try and argue that what I posted isn't the rule dexter?

The refs guidelines are the rules as well. They are, as far as I can tell, the rules that are amended between years, whereas the "laws of the game" essentially stay the same. Think of it as an appendix to the international laws of the game. You won't, for example, find any mention of a chicken wing or grapple tackle in the laws of the game - they get added to the referee guidelines. Next time the nrl want to outlaw another storm tactic, it'll also get added to the guidelines as opposed to the laws.

Anything in the referees guidelines are rules of the game too, otherwise the chicken wing and grapple tackle aren't actually outlawed. Same goes for the feet-first tackle - its not in the international laws of the game, only the referees guidelines. So tell me dexter, are those examples not actually illegal because they're "not a rule"?

Referees guidelines are rules. Please though, try and argue that they're not lol. I don't have anything really exciting to do today so I could do with a good laugh.

 

[Dexter]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

So going by that interpretation then, Slater did score a legit try last night.

I really don't like that rule .... Slater deadset lost control of that ball and just jammed it against the ground.

It's more than a little confusing but no I don't think he did, glad it didn't decide the game and glad it happened to Manly.

 

[Dexter]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

Are you really going to try and argue that what I posted isn't the rule dexter?

The refs guidelines are the rules as well. They are, as far as I can tell, the rules that are amended between years, whereas the "laws of the game" essentially stay the same. Think of it as an appendix to the international laws of the game. You won't, for example, find any mention of a chicken wing or grapple tackle in the laws of the game - they get added to the referee guidelines. Next time the nrl want to outlaw another storm tactic, it'll also get added to the guidelines as opposed to the laws.

Anything in the referees guidelines are rules of the game too, otherwise the chicken wing and grapple tackle aren't actually outlawed. Same goes for the feet-first tackle - its not in the international laws of the game, only the referees guidelines. So tell me dexter, are those examples not actually illegal because they're "not a rule"?

Referees guidelines are rules. Please though, try and argue that they're not lol. I don't have anything really exciting to do today so I could do with a good laugh.

One is called the Laws of the Game 2012 and the other is called the refs guidelines 2011, make of it what you will AP.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

One is called the Laws of the Game 2012 and the other is called the refs guidelines 2011, make of it what you will AP.

So answer my question please - are feet first sliding tackles illegal? Chicken wings? Grapple tackles?

None are outlawed by the laws of the game, only the referees guidelines.

 

[Dexter]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

Definition of misconduct

1. A player is guilty of misconduct if he:

(a) trips, kicks or strikes another player.

(b) when effecting or attempting to effect a tackle
makes contact with the head or neck of an
opponent intentionally, recklessly or carelessly.

They are illegal as it says so in the Laws of the game 2012, the fact that the numpties need explanatory notes does not make those notes Laws of the game.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

Chicken wing is not covered by any of those definitions.
Feet first sliding tackle is not covered by those definitions.

So they're legal?

 

[Kaz]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

So answer my question please - are feet first sliding tackles illegal? Chicken wings? Grapple tackles?

None are outlawed by the laws of the game, only the referees guidelines.

Going by this site

Which is the New South Wales Rugby League Referees Association (I think it is)

PLAYER SAFETY -


In the interest of player safety the following will attract penalties.

a) Any high contact with the head or neck.
b) Grapple or crusher tackles
c) Chicken wings
d) Attacking the head of a player whilst he is on the ground.
e) Unnecessary contact on a player when he is no longer in possession.
f) An unnecessary hit on the kicker


http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page.cgi?c=1-6623-0-0-0&sID=108353

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

Yeh that's from the referee guidelines, which according to dexter are not enforceable rules.

 

[Dexter]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

(i) behaves in any way contrary to the true spirit of
the game.

That would cover chicken wing and sliding feet first is covered by kicking or striking as it says in the Laws of the Game 2012.

Once again, as best as I can tell the refs guidelines are a numpties (refs) reference point. I cannot find anywhere that says they are an appendage to the laws, I think they exist to try and get some consistency with interpretation.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

where is "true spirit of the game" defined?

also, i would assume that stipulation has been in the laws for a long time, yet sliding feet first to make a tackle was legal up until 2011. they didnt amend the international laws document to add it in, so again, what makes it illegal? the referees guidelines.

after a bit of research, i found this on wikipedia - now i know its wikipedia, but it has sources/references:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_rugby_league

"The current 17 sections, which include notes, are detailed in fewer than 50 pages and around 17,000 words. The Laws are further clarified through practice and the enforcement by referees of rulings and guidelines issued by their governing bodies. These guidelines, and the referees themselves, may utilise the flexible provisions of the Laws to officiate the Game without the need to amend the Laws, for example Section 15, Law 1 (i) allows a judgement of misconduct to be made against a player for behaviour "in any way contrary to the true spirit of the game".[5] That law was used to combat the incidence of chicken-wing tackling techniques, for example.[6][7]".

now i have no doubt youll dismiss that since its wikipedia, but youre fighting an unwinnable battle. there is NO mention whatsoever in the entire laws of the game document about "separation", yet separation regularly comes into play in referees decisions because it has been amended to the laws through the referees guidelines. same with chicken wing, grapple tackle, feet first sliding tackle, and most recently the "cannonball". again, none of these are mentioned anywhere in the laws of the game - they are amended in to the rules via the referee guidelines under the rule of behaving "within the true spirit of the game".

 

[Dexter]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

So we agree then, the Laws are the Laws and the guidelines are issued by the referees governing body to help the numpties work them out.

It still doesn't make last nights decision correct. The Laws of the game 2012 say clearly that was not a try, it seems the refs pay more attention to the guidelines than the Laws.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

So we agree then, the Laws are the Laws and the guidelines are issued by the referees governing body to help the numpties work them out.

It still doesn't make last nights decision correct. The Laws of the game 2012 say clearly that was not a try, it seems the refs pay more attention to the guidelines than the Laws.

no, you dont seem to be understanding lol. did you even read the bit i highlighted? It says that rules are allowed to be enforced by adding them to the referees guidelines without having to amend the laws of the game.

the guidelines are used to clarify and add to the laws so that the "laws" document isnt constantly changing. theyre not there to help them work out the rules, theyre there to ADD to the rules.

take separation for example. nowhere in the laws is separation mentioned. nowhere. the NRL changed how the ball could be grounded from requiring control to just requiring no separation, agreed? they DID NOT change this in the laws of the game document. what they did do however is add it to the referee guidelines, as this is where they are able to quickly and easily add new rules that are 100% enforceable.

another good example is the new "downtown" rule. again - theres no mention of it whatsoever in the Laws of the game document. it was added to the referee guidelines as such:

"DOWNTOWN CHASERS
Any player who is in front of the kicker in a general play kick is not permitted too intentionally
advance beyond the point of the previous play the ball until the ball has gone past the offside
player"

if the referee guidelines werent rules then this would not be enforceable. the offside player would be able to advance beyond the point of the previous play of the ball as long as they dont come within 10m of the kick returner. because they are enforceable though, we now have the "downtown" rule.

the referee guidelines are enforceable rules. there are no ifs, buts or maybes about this - they are rules, just like the ones in the "laws of the game" document are.

do you seriously still not understand this?

 

[Dexter]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

No, I think you are wrong they are not Laws of the game or else they would be called that.

 

[Anonymous person]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

No, I think you are wrong they are not Laws of the game or else they would be called that.

wow.

ok how about this example then - stripping the ball while the ball carrier is in the act of grounding the ball.

this was brought in a few years back, correct? you agree that it is 100% legal for the defenders to strip the ball carrier of the ball if he is attempting to ground the ball in-goals, no matter how many defenders are in the tackle, correct?

well its not in the laws of the game either. nowhere. the only mentions of stealing/stripping the ball are saying 1-on-1 is ok, 2 or more on 1 is not. the REFEREE GUIDELINES however were amended to have the following:

"The ball may be stripped from the ball carrier if the ball carrier is attempting to ground the ball
for a try."

so i ask you again dexter, if the referee guidelines are not rules then why are the rules contained in it being enforced?

what dont you understand about the fact that the Referees Guidelines are used to amend rules to the laws of the game, without the need to edit the laws of the game document 3/4/5/6/7+ times a year? its really not hard to understand at all.

 

[Dexter]

Re: Finals Week 3 Discussion

another good example is the new "downtown" rule. again - theres no mention of it whatsoever in the Laws of the game document. it was added to the referee guidelines as such:

"DOWNTOWN CHASERS
Any player who is in front of the kicker in a general play kick is not permitted too intentionally
advance beyond the point of the previous play the ball until the ball has gone past the offside
player"

This is in the Laws of the game Section 14 The Offside rule

“Down town”

Any player who is in front of the kicker in general play is not
permitted to advance beyond the point of the previous playthe-
ball until the ball has gone past the offside players. This
rule delays the movement of the offside players downfield in
an attempt to encircle the ball receiver as he collects the ball.

Sound familiar