Round 12 - end of the crackdown

[Foordy]

There will be some movement on this now the Broncos game is over ... especially now that Robinson has had a whinge about it. either it will end ... or some stupid rule that has no chance of working will be introduced to combat diving.

Robinson says:

“The issue I have is a head high [on Manu] that would have been sent to the bin two weeks ago, but we don’t want our players to lie down. Then the commentating around it from referees is ‘they have stood up [so] I am OK with that’,” Robinson fired.

“Players aren’t going to lie down. They are going to get up and get on with it. They are going to jump up, for the most part.

“That was a silly challenge from Benny, and he got 10 minutes in the bin, but the one on Joey Manu … the NRL has put it back on this gamesmanship or the gentlemen’s agreement. I can’t believe I heard that [from the referee] out there.”

Robinson said the placement of Liu on report was “ridiculous”.

“How do they put that on report? Come on,” he said.

“It looks like they have a bit to work out. It has been calibrated a bit but we are still not seeing the way that we want to play the game.

“They basically want players to lie down and grab their neck to put [the defender] on report or to the bin.

“If the difference is their communication that ‘they got up’ or ‘[they] stayed down’ then they are saying to our players to lie down. That is unacceptable from our game.”

 

[Sproj]

There will be some movement on this now the Broncos game is over ... especially now that Robinson has had a whinge about it. either it will end ... or some stupid rule that has no chance of working will be introduced to combat diving.

Robinson says:

“The issue I have is a head high [on Manu] that would have been sent to the bin two weeks ago, but we don’t want our players to lie down. Then the commentating around it from referees is ‘they have stood up [so] I am OK with that’,” Robinson fired.

“Players aren’t going to lie down. They are going to get up and get on with it. They are going to jump up, for the most part.

“That was a silly challenge from Benny, and he got 10 minutes in the bin, but the one on Joey Manu … the NRL has put it back on this gamesmanship or the gentlemen’s agreement. I can’t believe I heard that [from the referee] out there.”

Robinson said the placement of Liu on report was “ridiculous”.

“How do they put that on report? Come on,” he said.

“It looks like they have a bit to work out. It has been calibrated a bit but we are still not seeing the way that we want to play the game.

“They basically want players to lie down and grab their neck to put [the defender] on report or to the bin.

“If the difference is their communication that ‘they got up’ or ‘[they] stayed down’ then they are saying to our players to lie down. That is unacceptable from our game.”

Man I wish we had a good coach.

 

[Foordy]

Man I wish we had a good coach.

If Kevvie or DD complained about it the NRL would just double down.

p.s. I assume you rate Bennett as a coach ... or at least have at some point in the past. because in over 30 years of watching his teams, i don't recall him calling out officials a single time

 

[LittleDavey]

I'd change so many rules about this sport at the moment.
- 7 tackle sets can only be awarded if the defending team catches the ball on the full. They need to earn it.
- Suspensions are only for violent/really bad acts. A 1% of a a players salary fine would suffice for other illegal acts.
- Set restarts (if they really fucking need them) only occur inside the opposition half. Inside your own half you get to kick for touch.
- 5 minute sin bins need to be brought in
- Legs tackles to be considered like dominant tackles used to be, especially if they want to crack down on high tackles
- The Panthers have to play the ball with their feet at least half the time
- Blockers should be penalized every time. If they're not attempting to catch it's a penalty every time
- Attacking players shouldn't be able to help their team mate or "lend weight" if they're being pushed back into the goal/out of the field of play. That's pretty much an obstruction
- Players have to move forward when a tap is made, not when the ref blows his whistle (already a rule but they never care)
- Passes actually have to go backwards. There's too much grey area with the hands having to go backwards and it's always ruled differently
- Go back to the old stripping rule
- If a player is laying in the ruck, the defense can't move forward until the dummy half has picked up the ball
-Get rid of the scrum and kick off clock. They never use it anyway
- 2 point field goals are stupid

Off the field
- Home team commentators (especially on Fox)
- A luxury tax for clubs that actually earn money off the field. This would push clubs to be successful off the field or kill them, allowing for expansion to new markets
- Debutant compensation. A player who debuts for your club get's an extra 10% off the salary cap or something
- NRL Media taking priority over idiots like Hooper and Kent
- A trade and transfer window
- Proper rep weekends with 3 games for each team. QLD VS NSW, NZ VS Tonga or Samoa (or a joint team), QLD residents VS NSW residents, women's Origin etc.
- A proper reserve grade competition
- Attempt to take the name Rugby back as it's far more marketable and known worldwide

This is so, so good. @Cult for NRL CEO, PM and President of the World.

A few of these things are meant to be rules anyway. Playing the ball with your feet (what happened to that crackdown btw?). The 'lending weight' thing is stupid, I thought the only attacking player allowed to touch defenders was the ball carrier? The blocking/escorting thing is so far gone now, again, any interference if not clearly going for the ball should be penalised.

I hate the new stripping rule, and not just because of lastnight. How is it fair that a ball carrier can be struggling against 3 defenders trying to hold him up/roll him on his back/whatever other wrestling bullshit is in vogue, then all of a sudden everyone lets go except the one defender with both arms around the ball? Unfair advantage IMO. One-on-one with no-one else in the tackle, that's fine. It's like the stripping rule, what's a strip vs a lost ball? That's always been a source of inconsistency and I don't have the answer there.

Compensation for in-house players is a must IMO. As is some sort of bonus for clubs that are profitable. The NRL doesn't seem to realise they would be wealthier if they didn't need to hand out so much to the struggling clubs.

Just so many things wrong with the game atm. Could be the best game in the world but it's completely hamstrung by inept and corrupt administration. Always has been (looking at you NSWRL). Can we bring Super League back?

 

[Sproj]

This is so, so good. @Cult for NRL CEO, PM and President of the World.

A few of these things are meant to be rules anyway. Playing the ball with your feet (what happened to that crackdown btw?). The 'lending weight' thing is stupid, I thought the only attacking player allowed to touch defenders was the ball carrier? The blocking/escorting thing is so far gone now, again, any interference if not clearly going for the ball should be penalised.

I hate the new stripping rule, and not just because of lastnight. How is it fair that a ball carrier can be struggling against 3 defenders trying to hold him up/roll him on his back/whatever other wrestling bullshit is in vogue, then all of a sudden everyone lets go except the one defender with both arms around the ball? Unfair advantage IMO. One-on-one with no-one else in the tackle, that's fine. It's like the stripping rule, what's a strip vs a lost ball? That's always been a source of inconsistency and I don't have the answer there.

Compensation for in-house players is a must IMO. As is some sort of bonus for clubs that are profitable. The NRL doesn't seem to realise they would be wealthier if they didn't need to hand out so much to the struggling clubs.

Just so many things wrong with the game atm. Could be the best game in the world but it's completely hamstrung by inept and corrupt administration. Always has been (looking at you NSWRL). Can we bring Super League back?

I like the stripping rule but I hate it at the same time because there is still the penalty for hands on the ball. So you have a guy with his arms wrapped around the ball and two defenders drop off and he steals it…so…hands on the ball right? And the hands on the ball penalty is so haphazard as well. Just a poorly run competition all round.

 

[Foordy]

**** has taken aim at Hethrington on Triple M, basically saying it was his own fault he was sent off ... then he gets into it with Tallis and Hooper for trying to defend Hethrington

here is the exchange:

“It is the perfect case of accidents happen in our game,” Tallis said on Triple M.

“The ball carrier couldn’t control where he was going and the guy (Hetherington) that is tackling him probably would have hit him in the chest if he stays upright.

“So he can’t react that quick.”

“Exactly,” James Hooper agreed.

“Well bad luck,” Kent interjected.

“That’s his fault. If he can’t react that quick he shouldn’t be in that position.”

“Oh come on Kenty you have played footy Mate, how is he meant to change in that split second?” Hooper asked.

“So you are saying it should have been a send-off?”

“This is the whole point. look I have no doubt it was a tough call,” Kent replied.

“But the fact that everyone with the benefit of hindsight sits down and says they should have done this and splits hairs over all the different angles they have seen.

“The referee made a call on the run and OK I don’t particularly believe he got it right, but I’m not going to sit here and make excuses for the tackle and make excuses for these people who think it shouldn’t have been a send-off.

“The ref made a call live with it.”

“I think the players have done a fantastic job of lowering their targets,” Tallis offered.

“And Kobe Hetherington didn’t and he paid the price,” Kent interjected.

“It is because he drops two feet,” Tallis hit back.

“He doesn’t drop two feet please,” Kent said.

“There was no doubt he tripped and he was on his way down, but you cannot argue with me that if he actually had a lower target zone he wouldn’t have hit him in the face.

“He might have hit him on the ball, but that’s what they are trying to get rid of these tackles on the ball, which are 50/50 calls.

“There is too many target zones being the ball area and let’s remember it is a rounded surface, so you either hit it and go up or hit it and go down. Too many are hitting it and going up.

“If you had a lower target zone when he tripped he would have fallen into his arms. I have got no problem with the referee. I don’t necessarily agree that it was a send-off, like most people, but the fact is the referee made a call on the run, live with it.

“We just sit and bitch and moan about the way it is in hindsight all the time. The fact is it is a decision made on the field. Just live with it. Don’t sit there now and have to re-write the whole rule book because you don’t like one tackle.”

“No one is saying that, they just got that decision wrong,” Tallis hit back.

“It is as simple as that. That has never been a send-off.”

 

[ivanhungryjak]

 

[Foordy]

I agree ... but i fear we'll accpet it because we only get one "not guilty" at the Judiciary per decade and we won't waste it on a case like this.

Vlandy's will likely put pressure on the panel to back him up

 

[BroncsFan]

**** has taken aim at Hethrington on Triple M, basically saying it was his own fault he was sent off ... then he gets into it with Tallis and Hooper for trying to defend Hethrington

here is the exchange:

“It is the perfect case of accidents happen in our game,” Tallis said on Triple M.

“The ball carrier couldn’t control where he was going and the guy (Hetherington) that is tackling him probably would have hit him in the chest if he stays upright.

“So he can’t react that quick.”

“Exactly,” James Hooper agreed.

“Well bad luck,” Kent interjected.

“That’s his fault. If he can’t react that quick he shouldn’t be in that position.”

“Oh come on Kenty you have played footy Mate, how is he meant to change in that split second?” Hooper asked.

“So you are saying it should have been a send-off?”

“This is the whole point. look I have no doubt it was a tough call,” Kent replied.

“But the fact that everyone with the benefit of hindsight sits down and says they should have done this and splits hairs over all the different angles they have seen.

“The referee made a call on the run and OK I don’t particularly believe he got it right, but I’m not going to sit here and make excuses for the tackle and make excuses for these people who think it shouldn’t have been a send-off.

“The ref made a call live with it.”

“I think the players have done a fantastic job of lowering their targets,” Tallis offered.

“And Kobe Hetherington didn’t and he paid the price,” Kent interjected.

“It is because he drops two feet,” Tallis hit back.

“He doesn’t drop two feet please,” Kent said.

“There was no doubt he tripped and he was on his way down, but you cannot argue with me that if he actually had a lower target zone he wouldn’t have hit him in the face.

“He might have hit him on the ball, but that’s what they are trying to get rid of these tackles on the ball, which are 50/50 calls.

“There is too many target zones being the ball area and let’s remember it is a rounded surface, so you either hit it and go up or hit it and go down. Too many are hitting it and going up.

“If you had a lower target zone when he tripped he would have fallen into his arms. I have got no problem with the referee. I don’t necessarily agree that it was a send-off, like most people, but the fact is the referee made a call on the run, live with it.

“We just sit and bitch and moan about the way it is in hindsight all the time. The fact is it is a decision made on the field. Just live with it. Don’t sit there now and have to re-write the whole rule book because you don’t like one tackle.”

“No one is saying that, they just got that decision wrong,” Tallis hit back.

“It is as simple as that. That has never been a send-off.”

The stupid thing is if he drops his target zone then he's probably driving harder with his shoulder and could get him more flush in the face... or CHN goes flying over the top and Kobe probably flips him over onto his head.

Kunt also belongs to the organisation that uses Chad Townsend's late shoulder charge to Ponga's head in all of their highlight videos. If he cares about perspective of the game so much why is he not campaigning to remove it

 

[theshed]

**** has taken aim at Hethrington on Triple M, basically saying it was his own fault he was sent off ... then he gets into it with Tallis and Hooper for trying to defend Hethrington

here is the exchange:

“It is the perfect case of accidents happen in our game,” Tallis said on Triple M.

“The ball carrier couldn’t control where he was going and the guy (Hetherington) that is tackling him probably would have hit him in the chest if he stays upright.

“So he can’t react that quick.”

“Exactly,” James Hooper agreed.

“Well bad luck,” Kent interjected.

“That’s his fault. If he can’t react that quick he shouldn’t be in that position.”

“Oh come on Kenty you have played footy Mate, how is he meant to change in that split second?” Hooper asked.

“So you are saying it should have been a send-off?”

“This is the whole point. look I have no doubt it was a tough call,” Kent replied.

“But the fact that everyone with the benefit of hindsight sits down and says they should have done this and splits hairs over all the different angles they have seen.

“The referee made a call on the run and OK I don’t particularly believe he got it right, but I’m not going to sit here and make excuses for the tackle and make excuses for these people who think it shouldn’t have been a send-off.

“The ref made a call live with it.”

“I think the players have done a fantastic job of lowering their targets,” Tallis offered.

“And Kobe Hetherington didn’t and he paid the price,” Kent interjected.

“It is because he drops two feet,” Tallis hit back.

“He doesn’t drop two feet please,” Kent said.

“There was no doubt he tripped and he was on his way down, but you cannot argue with me that if he actually had a lower target zone he wouldn’t have hit him in the face.

“He might have hit him on the ball, but that’s what they are trying to get rid of these tackles on the ball, which are 50/50 calls.

“There is too many target zones being the ball area and let’s remember it is a rounded surface, so you either hit it and go up or hit it and go down. Too many are hitting it and going up.

“If you had a lower target zone when he tripped he would have fallen into his arms. I have got no problem with the referee. I don’t necessarily agree that it was a send-off, like most people, but the fact is the referee made a call on the run, live with it.

“We just sit and bitch and moan about the way it is in hindsight all the time. The fact is it is a decision made on the field. Just live with it. Don’t sit there now and have to re-write the whole rule book because you don’t like one tackle.”

“No one is saying that, they just got that decision wrong,” Tallis hit back.

“It is as simple as that. That has never been a send-off.”

Kent’s staunch and unwavering views on the head knocks - out of nowhere by the way, I never notice him campaigning for this crackdown prior - can’t be coming anywhere except from ulterior motives. Kent has heavily covered the NRL player boxing bouts and never once commented on whether it was bad for their health.
He completely shouts down any reasonable argument or discussion on the topic. I won’t speculate on what his motivation is but I don’t for a second buy that it’s for the good of player welfare. Especially when he’s aggressively talking down the the guy who’s job it is the represent the players.

 

[BroncosFever]

It's hard to take a bloke seriously when he's defending officials for coming down hard on head knocks meanwhile being a tragic Boxing fan

It'd be a bit like an animal rights activist being a jockey

 

[Sproj]

It's hard to take a bloke seriously when he's defending officials for coming down hard on head knocks meanwhile being a tragic Boxing fan

It'd be a bit like an animal rights activist being a jockey

Its Paul Kent, it is hard to take anything he says about anything seriously.

 

[tommy]

Paul Kent’s problem is that he’s not that important, but he wishes he was, so he acts like he is.

 

[Nashy]

“Oh come on Kenty you have played footy Mate, how is he meant to change in that split second?” Hooper asked.

Hope this was a dig at his career.