Six Again Calls

[Kooly87]

AFL. Not only are out Qld teams good now, they both are really fun to watch.

I'm actually working on a theory that posits that both the Lions and Broncos can never be good at the same time. It's almost like some perfect natural balancing act that ensures whenever one goes up, the other comes down.

The Lions were simply great in 2019 and are a huge chance for a flag this year. The last time they were looking at going on a run this good was way back in 2001, when we also happened to lose 9 in a row.

 

[Jedhead]

You know what they should fix, the player playing the ball on the mark not three feet to the left which make the makers not square...

I like to read the comments on social media to see what the general nrl fans opinions are on things, at first most people were all in favour for the 6 again rule but now the tides are turning and there is some genuine hate for it for reasons all ready started on here weeks ago.

Yeh, it happens every week in games. Players get up and 'stumble' forward just a foot or two to the left or right which automatically puts one or sometimes both the markers offside and the refs are so busy checking the ten, keeping the count, and deciding which way to run next to keep up with the play that they miss this subtle act of cheating. Rolling the ball under the foot has also crept back into the game unchecked. There has not been a single penalty called for it this year as far as know yet Fifita for Cronulla does 3 or 4 each sesh he is on the field. And the amount of knock-ons that are being missed are simply unforgivable.

Surprise, surprise most of these infringements are spotted immediately a Broncos player does it, but for some reason it's only Broncos fans that see the opposition doing it. Strange - very strange.

 

[Sproj]

They went the wrong way, should have been 4 refs, not 1. They aren't good enough to run a game even in pairs.

 

[Dexter]

Yeh, it happens every week in games. Players get up and 'stumble' forward just a foot or two to the left or right which automatically puts one or sometimes both the markers offside and the refs are so busy checking the ten, keeping the count, and deciding which way to run next to keep up with the play that they miss this subtle act of cheating. Rolling the ball under the foot has also crept back into the game unchecked. There has not been a single penalty called for it this year as far as know yet Fifita for Cronulla does 3 or 4 each sesh he is on the field. And the amount of knock-ons that are being missed are simply unforgivable.

Surprise, surprise most of these infringements are spotted immediately a Broncos player does it, but for some reason it's only Broncos fans that see the opposition doing it. Strange - very strange.

So lets bring in a rule if the attacking side walks off the mark it's automatic last tackle.

These idiots just keep trying to fix things with changes instead of enforcing the rules they already had. In 5 years the game will look nothing like it used to.

 

[tommy]

And the amount of knock-ons that are being missed are simply unforgivable.

Great point. Now that you mention it there has been a lot of missed knock ons.

 

[TimWhatley]

There is one piece of data that can't easily be included and that is the when and where the set restarts are called. A restart coming out of your own half on tackle 1 or 2 is completely different to a restart on tackle 3-5 in the opposition 20.

It's proof the the dumbshits in charge of this rule barely even thought about it before implementation. If they did they would've realised that adding 6 tackles would've been better than restarting the count. Add 6 tackles on tackle 1 you get 12 tackles all up, add 6 on tackle 5 you get 12 all up.

Restart the count on tackle 1 you get 7 tackles all up, restart the count on tackle 5 you get 12.

 

[Foordy]

while talking about rule changes, let's simplify the forward pass rule, it's too fucking complicated for refs to determine which way the hands were facing...

how about this for a novel idea ... if the pass is propelled forward towards the opponents try line, then it is a forward pass (the manner in which it was propelled forward is irrelevant)

 

[Galah]

while talking about rule changes, let's simplify the forward pass rule, it's too fucking complicated for refs to determine which way the hands were facing...

how about this for a novel idea ... if the pass is propelled forward towards the opponents try line, then it is a forward pass (the manner in which it was propelled forward is irrelevant)

That’s too black and white mate, they can’t pick and choose then...

 

[Culhwch]

It's proof the the dumbshits in charge of this rule barely even thought about it before implementation. If they did they would've realised that adding 6 tackles would've been better than restarting the count. Add 6 tackles on tackle 1 you get 12 tackles all up, add 6 on tackle 5 you get 12 all up.

Restart the count on tackle 1 you get 7 tackles all up, restart the count on tackle 5 you get 12.

So much this. The way the rule is implemented means that the advantage and disadvantage for the exact same infringement is wildly variable. It boggles the mind how anyone ever thought this was a fair rule to introduce.

Someone posited earlier in the thread it should just be one additional tackle, which would ensure parity across all decisions. That would have been the rational and sensible thing to have done, so of course it wouldn't have ever been considered.

 

[BRC088]

The Brisbane Times (paywall)

Refresh the page, hit escape before the page finishes loading. You might have to do it a few times.

 

[Jedhead]

Refresh the page, hit escape before the page finishes loading. You might have to do it a few times.

Legend.

 

[Waynesaurus]

Its really sad, the whole game overtime is just being narrowed down into this one play style and ultimately if your squad doesn't suit what is now 'touch football style' you are screwed.

They need to farkin can all these black and white, nit picky rules and let the game flow, the game has grey areas, let the referees use their common sense and 'feel' for the game rather than sticking to rules so friggin rigidly.

Clubs should be able to play their own 'style' of game and still have a chance, we've all but lost that individuality to each club now.

The clubs are all the same just with different levels of rosters, all are trying to play the same style just with different degrees of success.

 

[Dexter]

So much this. The way the rule is implemented means that the advantage and disadvantage for the exact same infringement is wildly variable. It boggles the mind how anyone ever thought this was a fair rule to introduce.

Someone posited earlier in the thread it should just be one additional tackle, which would ensure parity across all decisions. That would have been the rational and sensible thing to have done, so of course it wouldn't have ever been considered.

The rule was intended to replace penalties. If you had a penalty in tackles 1 to 5 you get the same result just no kick.

 

[Broncapz]

The rule was intended to replace penalties. If you had a penalty in tackles 1 to 5 you get the same result just no kick.

A lot of the 6 again calls should just be one additional tackle. This would allow the refs to enforce the rules consistantly without blowing the game wide open. Sometimes 6 again/penalty is far too harsh of a punishment for a team.

 

[Dexter]

A lot of the 6 again calls should just be one additional tackle. This would allow the refs to enforce the rules consistantly without blowing the game wide open. Sometimes 6 again/penalty is far too harsh of a punishment for a team.

Agree but what I thought the rule was supposed to do was replace penalties where possible and reduce stoppages, not go berserk like when we played parra.

 

[Broncapz]

Agree but what I thought the rule was supposed to do was replace penalties where possible and reduce stoppages, not go berserk like when we played parra.

In theory the rule was fine, but in practice it's exhausting teams and feels like games are decided much earlier then they used to be. Reffing is probably deciding the game more than it ever has.

 

[Dexter]

In theory the rule was fine, but in practice it's exhausting teams and feels like games are decided much earlier then they used to be. Reffing is probably deciding the game more than it ever has.

Probably we just need to adjust better and get fitter.
I dont know how Parra can get their big Islander boys so fit and we can't.
They punch out big minutes every week and the whole team is still rushing up in D in the 80th minute. Strange how we are so far off the pace fitness wise..
Just another area we seem to be deficient in.

 

[Culhwch]

The rule was intended to replace penalties. If you had a penalty in tackles 1 to 5 you get the same result just no kick.

Fair call. But it doesn't really seem to have replaced penalties, but rather just it made it easier for referees to make trifling calls that would otherwise be negatively scrutinised if the play stopped for a kick for touch.

If you want to introduce varying degrees of penalty -- that is a kick for touch or goal is weighted more heavily than simply restarting the set -- I don't think this is how you do it. In fact I think the repeat restarts are giving more advantage than a stop in play, kick for touch, and a restart against a set line is, particularly once a team is past the halfway line. That's where a six again call on the fourth or fifth tackle for a negligible ruck infringement is giving the attacking team an unbalanced advantage.