POST GAME [Round 18, 2022] Broncos vs Titans

[Brotherdu]

I actually really like that rule where the attacker realises there has been an obstruction and takes a knee. I like the fact it’s play on.

I think that is the point right? It It's a rule, then it should be blown, otherwise get rid of it.

 

[MrTickyMcG]

I've never actually understood why it's a penalty if you kick it out on the full from a kick off.

Exactly this; by the same token why isn't a kick out on the full in general play a penalty? Surely the advantage is that you get the ball back from where it was kicked? Maybe it is to discourage short kick offs, as there is no significant penalty to getting it wrong.

 

[Mustafur]

I've never actually understood why it's a penalty if you kick it out on the full from a kick off.

It's a penalty for being shit.

 

[_wwong]

It's a penalty for being shit.

Isaako has left the chat.

 

[Culhwch]

I've never actually understood why it's a penalty if you kick it out on the full from a kick off.

Replace it with a twenty metre tap and seven tackle set? Seems a more balanced result, so no chance it happens.

 

[Big Del]

I think the blanket shoulder charge ban is a shit rule.

If you get them in the head, off and min 4 weeks suspended. Otherwise should be play on. What's wrong with rocking someone off balance with a massive shoulder?

Whip lash and neck injuries .
Rugby Union has has a rule about wrapping the arms for a long time .

 

[Renegade]

Whip lash and neck injuries .
Rugby Union has has a rule about wrapping the arms for a long time .

It's a contact sport, you run the risk of whiplash when taking a hitup. Shoulder charges are the easy way out and a bandaid solution so they can be seen to be making an effort, wherein hitups happen probably a hundred times a game and are a far bigger risk for CTE.

I get the risk minimization angle, but like aforementioned, if they were serious about it they'd have to gut the game...

I don't really care what Union does (not being rude), it's a shit boring game and we'd do well to steer clear of any changes they implement.

 

[Organix]

It's definitely a shit rule, given that no one here can agree on it even having read the actual rules. It also doesn't feel right, and that's even more important.

Other shit rules:

Incorrect play the ball: just do it again. Shit happens.
Deliberate forward pass: no one ever means to pass forward. Just hand it over. It's not a penalty.
Two on one strip: give the ball back and get on with it.

I would add the 7 tackle set from an attacking kick within 20m of the opposition try line. That is a huge momentum shift as it currently is.

Deliberate forward pass: There are many people who throw them deliberately. They don't get penalised regardless.

Two on one strip: that should be a penalty. It's a delay tactic at worst. There needs to be a deterrent to such plays. So often 1v1 goes to a ground wrestle and the tackle lasts twice as long even without the strip. The "stripper" needs to release super pronto IMO.

Incorrect PTB: yeah , this should be consistent or not at all. It's arbitrary right now, but **** that tunnel ball BS. It's not touch footy.

 

[McHunt]

Deliberate forward pass: There are many people who throw them deliberately. They don't get penalised regardless.

Why would anyone deliberately pass forward knowing that it will almost certainly result in losing the ball? They have at least three officials watching them. I'm not buying that one.

Two on one strip: that should be a penalty. It's a delay tactic at worst. There needs to be a deterrent to such plays. So often 1v1 goes to a ground wrestle and the tackle lasts twice as long even without the strip. The "stripper" needs to release super pronto IMO.

Because it's part of shutting down offloads. You should be allowed to attack the ball, but not win it if there's another player involved. If the ball carrier is being gang tackled his first priority is to make sure he doesn't break a limb in the fall rather than have to worry about spilling the ball. It's really not that important. But yeah, I realize we all think it is because it's an ingrained part of the game.

 

[Sproj]

I reckon the second worst rule after six agains is hands on the ball being a penalty. This is rarely ever called and seems purely to be there as a way to directly influence the flow of the game. Every single time you have 2 or 3 guys in a tackle and they peel off to allow the strip attempt, there are obviously hands on the ball, so unless the entire tackle is one on one, it should be a penalty based in this stupid rule.

 

[Organix]

Why would anyone deliberately pass forward knowing that it will almost certainly result in losing the ball? They have at least three officials watching them. I'm not buying that one.

Cam Smith, Damien Cook, Mick Ennis. Most modern hookers do it to gain a slight advantage. They do it to push the limits. It happens.

Because it's part of shutting down offloads. You should be allowed to attack the ball, but not win it if there's another player involved. If the ball carrier is being gang tackled his first priority is to make sure he doesn't break a limb in the fall rather than have to worry about spilling the ball. It's really not that important. But yeah, I realize we all think it is because it's an ingrained part of the game.

I'm ok with shutting down an offload. I'm not ok with it "accidentally" turning into a strip of the ball. There is a duty of care on the ball carrier, and yeah self-preservation aspects as well, but to say that players don't push the limits to test the boundaries of the rules... there needs to be a deterrent for messing that up. Otherwise it would be stop/start NFL garbage.

"Oops. Ball came out. Teehee. Everyone set? Ok, let's go again."

Offloads are low percentage plays and also add to the spectacle. May as well say that if an offload gets dropped just give it back and let them play it as a tackle.

 

[Cult]

We can’t forward pass like other clubs. We are the only team to get pulled up on forward passes from the kick off when it’s done often. We don’t get the same calls as other teams

 

[heartly87]

It's a penalty for being shit.

I thought you got penalized because you hit the ball too sweetly.

 

[Brotherdu]

Some others I hate -

• Seven tackle set off an attacking kick in the 20. A kick on tackle 5 going for a try that misses by mm in some cases, doesn't deserve a 7 tackle set. It can really ruin a game. How about change it to any kicks from outside the 40m (or even 20m) that go out over the dead ball line result in a seven tackle set. It was introduced to stop people kicking it dead from a mile off to save time wasting and resetting the defensive line. This would have the same outcome.
• Knock-on by a tackling player. If no move was made to attack the ball, then play on.
• 1 on 1 knock on between 2 opposing players. If they knock on into each other whilst competing for the ball, then play on whoever retains possession. this would save a lot of time each game and speed it up even more.
• Stripping the ball. I don't care if it is 4 on 1, it's fair game, hold the ball. Again, this would be a massive reduction to the amount of time wasted and keeps the ref out of the game.
• 6 again for imaginary 'ruck infringement' is the worst rule ever and again gives refs a leeway over a game, even if it is subconscious. How about we have a timer that starts as soon as a ref calls held....then he has a ping in his ear after XX seconds, either the ball has been played, or the players are laying all over him. Take out the guess work. Who cares is hands are on the ball whilst the tackle is being made. Offside, square at marker, play the ball straight etc all seem like fairly easy things to manage, get rid of the grey areas......so and so was .5 sec slow getting off the player.
• Same with Flops, if the tackle is held and you flopped, well guess what, you just made it harder for your 2 team mates under you to get off in time......unless you flopped after held was called, then fair enough.

I think the refs for the most part do a good job. I reckon getting rid of a bunch of these rules that require them to either make an on the spot 50-50 call, or pause the game to go to the bunker would massively improve the game.

TLDR; Simplify the game and get rid of all the grey area, open to interpretation, 50/50 rules where the ref has to make a judgement.

 

[theshed]

The 1 rule I would change, and it is a really insignificant one that I think is just a coping mechanism from the Isaako days but, I think a kick off going out on the full being a standard penalty is to harsh of a punishment.

What I would suggest is that if a team kicks out on the full, the opposition gets the penalty but they should have to take the tap at half way.

Getting to kick for touch because a kick off went out on the full is such a severe penalty for a pretty minor error that occurs at the opposite side of the field. You kick out on the full, they kick for touch, and now you are defending on your own 20m line. A 50m penalty is enough without making it a 70m penalty.

 

[McHunt]

The 1 rule I would change, and it is a really insignificant one that I think is just a coping mechanism from the Isaako days but, I think a kick off going out on the full being a standard penalty is to harsh of a punishment.

What I would suggest is that if a team kicks out on the full, the opposition gets the penalty but they should have to take the tap at half way.

Getting to kick for touch because a kick off went out on the full is such a severe penalty for a pretty minor error that occurs at the opposite side of the field. You kick out on the full, they kick for touch, and now you are defending on your own 20m line. A 50m penalty is enough without making it a 70m penalty.

What if the penalty for kicking out on the full is canned laughter over the Tannoy?

 

[Fozz]

What if the penalty for kicking out on the full is canned laughter over the Tannoy?

I'd prefer the Benny Hill theme

 

[Renegade]

I thought you got penalized because you hit the ball too sweetly.

This is a bhq hall of fame meme. Thanks to all for keeping it alive.