Six Again Calls

[BroncsFan]

And why doesn't a 30/30 count?

I think I've said previously that a 30/30 would actually be more beneficial to the game and provide more tactical opportunities for teams.

- If it was a 30/30 the fullback and potentially a winger would likely have to be back defending the kick as soon as the opposition is outside the 20 and would have to stay back to keep defending the 40/20... that would open up the edges for quick spreads and more attacking footy within your own half.

- Teams don't often like kicking from within their 30, but as soon as you got a quick ptb you could fire a kick downfield and keep the opposition on the back foot to help swing momentum in the game... something that is needed in this current zero penalties world.

- The 30m line also gives you a bit more bang for your buck on the kick. A kick inside the 20m might barely see it get to the other side of the 50m, plus you're likely to be completely on the back foot with no momentum to kick from in the first place.... whereas a kick from your 30m, whilst not preferred, would likely see it get to the opposition 30m and tackling the kick returner somewhere around the 50m.

I mean how many times do you see a team kick from inside their 20m for any reason other than last tackle after being absolutely belted... the rule was only brought in because of the affiliation with the existing 40/20... it offers zero tactical purpose and was probably introduced after a pitch of "what about a 20/40 rule?!?!?"

 

[Old Mate]

I wasn't sure if this deserves a thread of it's own but...

10 minutes into the season after the rule was introduced I knew I hated it with a passion. My distaste is not because I cannot appreciate the upside of the rule but it IS all about the power to manipulate a game without oversight or accountability.

I had no issue with the rules that preceded it's introduction and thought that a referee could penalise a team unfairly BUT the stats would show how each referee treated a team over the distance. In other words there'd be evidence, something we could look at and question. One game in particular years ago enraged me, a game where we didn't receive a single penalty for a whole match. The opposition that day were apparently perfect which we all know is just not possible. They received 10 penalties I believe and we lost the game in the last few minutes courtesy of the 10th penalty.

My point is we could all see how biased and ridiculous such refereeing is, the evidence was there for all to see. The refs had enough power previously to rort games so why did we hand them even more power to orchestrate a result??? Suddenly they are not even accountable because penalties are down and the disparity not so great, unless of course it's the Broncos. Incidentally there was not one word spoken in the media about that game I mentioned earlier despite it being a historic statistical moment. I don't believe it has ever happened before or since. Sure, maybe there was a game where the count might have been one or two nil but FUCKING 10 NIL!!!! I'M STILL PISSED ABOUT IT HA HA.

Anyway, opinions on the new rule and why you hate it!!

Bang on.

 

[Organix]

I think I've said previously that a 30/30 would actually be more beneficial to the game and provide more tactical opportunities for teams.

- If it was a 30/30 the fullback and potentially a winger would likely have to be back defending the kick as soon as the opposition is outside the 20 and would have to stay back to keep defending the 40/20... that would open up the edges for quick spreads and more attacking footy within your own half.

- Teams don't often like kicking from within their 30, but as soon as you got a quick ptb you could fire a kick downfield and keep the opposition on the back foot to help swing momentum in the game... something that is needed in this current zero penalties world.

- The 30m line also gives you a bit more bang for your buck on the kick. A kick inside the 20m might barely see it get to the other side of the 50m, plus you're likely to be completely on the back foot with no momentum to kick from in the first place.... whereas a kick from your 30m, whilst not preferred, would likely see it get to the opposition 30m and tackling the kick returner somewhere around the 50m.

I mean how many times do you see a team kick from inside their 20m for any reason other than last tackle after being absolutely belted... the rule was only brought in because of the affiliation with the existing 40/20... it offers zero tactical purpose and was probably introduced after a pitch of "what about a 20/40 rule?!?!?"

Just like every other rule these days.

Your points are very good. Honestly, if there were any intelligent conversation that went into rules and regulations like:
6-again
20/40 (some brain)
7 tackle set from an erroneous attacking kick within the 20. (thanks Sowie, you prick)
1 or 2 Referee (make up your mind ffs)
The oh-so-successful "crackdown" (good one, Gus)
Player challenge (because players are so good at having a better view than the bunker and making their decision in 10 seconds)
The bloody bunker (as if that isn't biased and still can't get it right, why no 20/40 for Milf? Annesley: "yeah, mistakes happen")
The match review committee (ever so magnanimous to us)

We would have such a clean game. At the moment it's a circus where they introduce a new rule or 2 per year. For what? Speed? The product?

Fix what is broken first by having better and more discerning, confident refereeing and thought out rule implementation.

 

[Kooly87]

So I've done the maths since the Newcastle game...

So it turns out, we're -29 on For/Against so far this season.

That's not -29 in actual points mind you, that's -29 just in PENALTIES awarded For/Against.

To put how horrendous that is into context across the competition:

- It's not even close, the next worse off team is the Dragons in single digits at -7 which makes them still 22 penalties overall better off than us, or 3.6 penalties a week.

- Parramatta and Manly are the best off with both teams +18, so in effect they're currently 47 penalties better off than us, in just SIX Rounds of football, which is about 7.8 penalties a game better off than we are!

- Unbelievably, there are only 4 teams on the actual ladder (one of them is us) that have a worse For/Against in ACTUAL points scored/conceded than we have just in our penalty differential alone.

Honestly, I can appreciate we've been poor. In fact outright hopeless at times. But **** me, so have the Titans, Dragons and Warriors at times, and when you see referee controlled statistics like this are such significant statistical outliers, you really do have to ask if there isn't more to this than just us being playing woefully since the season kicked off.

 

[Organix]

So I've done the maths since the Newcastle game...

So it turns out, we're -29 on For/Against so far this season.

That's not -29 in actual points mind you, that's -29 just in PENALTIES awarded For/Against.

To put how horrendous that is into context across the competition:

- It's not even close, the next worse off team is the Dragons in single digits at -7 which makes them still 22 penalties overall better off than us, or 3.6 penalties a week.

- Parramatta and Manly are the best off with both teams +18, so in effect they're currently 47 penalties better off than us, in just SIX Rounds of football, which is about 7.8 penalties a game better off than we are!

- Unbelievably, there are only 4 teams on the actual ladder (one of them is us) that have a worse For/Against in ACTUAL points scored/conceded than we have just in our penalty differential alone.

Honestly, I can appreciate we've been poor. In fact outright hopeless at times. But **** me, so have the Titans, Dragons and Warriors at times, and when you see referee controlled statistics like this are such significant statistical outliers, you really do have to ask if there isn't more to this than just us being playing woefully since the season kicked off.

Absolutely. I understand that many people are upset with our performance and I am too. One would love to see more intestinal fortitude and resilience against the ref, but when you are CLEARLY up against it it is going to be an uphill battle after a landslide.

I cannot believe that we are that ill-disciplined compared to other teams. It just isn't possible to go from winning 2 games in a row to losing the penalty count so dramatically.

Do your stats include the 6-again calls?

 

[Kooly87]

Absolutely. I understand that many people are upset with our performance and I am too. One would love to see more intestinal fortitude and resilience against the ref, but when you are CLEARLY up against it it is going to be an uphill battle after a landslide.

I cannot believe that we are that ill-disciplined compared to other teams. It just isn't possible to go from winning 2 games in a row to losing the penalty count so dramatically.

Do your stats include the 6-again calls?

No six again calls, just straight up penalties. No idea if they keep an official count on those, but if they do then I'm guessing it will read exactly like our penalty statistics - most conceded AND also least awarded to us.

Your point about going from winning two games to losing the penalty count is actually also a little off. We were losing the penalty count even back before the break when we were winning games. The penalty numbers presented include those games we won.

We haven't actually won a penalty count since Round 24 last year, which means by the time we play the Titans tomorrow, it will have been almost to the exact day, about 10 months since we last actually won a penalty count.

 

[BroncsFan]

No six again calls, just straight up penalties. No idea if they keep an official count on those, but if they do then I'm guessing it will read exactly like our penalty statistics - most conceded AND also least awarded to us.

Your point about going from winning two games to losing the penalty count is actually also a little off. We were losing the penalty count even back before the break when we were winning games. The penalty numbers presented include those games we won.

We haven't actually won a penalty count since Round 24 last year, which means by the time we play the Titans tomorrow, it will have been almost to the exact day, about 10 months since we last actually won a penalty count.

Just as an FYI fox sports keep track of the set restarts (below)... just for a matter of interest the "pride of the league" won the set restart last night 7 vs 2, but lost the penalties 6 v 8... still a net of 13 vs 10 combined though

Penrith vs South Sydney Live Statistics - Premiership Round 7, 2020

Find live stats for Penrith vs South Sydney in Round 7 of the 2020 Premiership Season. Live goals & performance updates as it happens between Penrith & South Sydney.

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[Kooly87]

Just as an FYI fox sports keep track of the set restarts (below)... just for a matter of interest the "pride of the league" won the set restart last night 7 vs 2, but lost the penalties 6 v 8... still a net of 13 vs 10 combined though

Penrith vs South Sydney Live Statistics - Premiership Round 7, 2020

Find live stats for Penrith vs South Sydney in Round 7 of the 2020 Premiership Season. Live goals & performance updates as it happens between Penrith & South Sydney.

www.foxsports.com.au

They don't have a table for overall YTD for that yet, so I'd have to work it out club by club, but for Brisbane I can tell you we've received 9 and conceded 18.

Newcastle were awarded 8 in just one game against us last week, only 1 less than we've received in total across 4 Rounds so far.

 

[Organix]

Just as an FYI fox sports keep track of the set restarts (below)... just for a matter of interest the "pride of the league" won the set restart last night 7 vs 2, but lost the penalties 6 v 8... still a net of 13 vs 10 combined though

Penrith vs South Sydney Live Statistics - Premiership Round 7, 2020

Find live stats for Penrith vs South Sydney in Round 7 of the 2020 Premiership Season. Live goals & performance updates as it happens between Penrith & South Sydney.

www.foxsports.com.au

I'm not sure it is accurate. Was is really 2 vs 3 set restarts in the Eels game? If it was then it really demonstrates how the when and where of the 6-again impacts the game.

 

[Thelmus]

The repeat rule really destroys the notion of tactical sets. What's the point of offloading anywhere but near line if the majority of sets will end with a restart? And even worse, why bother throwing the ball in your own half?
We have made the most boring type of football, the best tactic. Now, teams that struggle to make yards normally are marched downfield. I predict our large forwards will soon become obsolete, without a rule change soon. It all comes down to being on your back at the play-the-ball. You can do that with much smaller forwards.
To me, the most exciting site to see is backline move deep in your own half that ends up a try. That's now insane to even try. If we must persist with this repeat rule we must at least bring back the 5 metres, so as to give the game some balance or reduce tackle counts.
Otherwise, we will have two teams of halves facing each other with a couple of big wingers each.

 

[Organix]

The repeat rule really destroys the notion of tactical sets. What's the point of offloading anywhere but near line if the majority of sets will end with a restart? And even worse, why bother throwing the ball in your own half?
We have made the most boring type of football, the best tactic. Now, teams that struggle to make yards normally are marched downfield. I predict our large forwards will soon become obsolete, without a rule change soon. It all comes down to being on your back at the play-the-ball. You can do that with much smaller forwards.
To me, the most exciting site to see is backline move deep in your own half that ends up a try. That's now insane to even try. If we must persist with this repeat rule we must at least bring back the 5 metres, so as to give the game some balance or reduce tackle counts.
Otherwise, we will have two teams of halves facing each other with a couple of big wingers each.

So you want to watch rugby union?

 

[teampjta]

I absolutely hate this rule and it has nothing to do with our poor discipline or ability to adapt. The refs ability to influence the results of a game is borderline match fixing. If we are to persist with such garbage I’d rather see an advantage played and if non taken then blow the god damn penalty

Unfortunately as this was a Vlandys lead rule change you won’t hear any backlash from the fox broadcasters (I don’t watch 9). Kenty whose always been outspoken is clearly biased towards his mate and refuses to even start let alone contribute to any discussions relating to any of Vlandys changes

edit: that said we’ve been absolutely garbage, no direction, poor discipline and no urgency in ANYTHING we do

 

[Organix]

Unfortunately, due to the nature of the rule and its potential for misuse or match-fixing (call it what you will) there will, of course, be proponents for it. They are those who benefit from the rule. This causes those who provide opposing viewpoints to appear merely as being a sore loser or unable to adapt.

 

[Thelmus]

So you want to watch rugby union?

Which is the greatest try in origin? It isnt a sprint from dummy half or even a dive at a bomb out wide, its the mark coyne try that goes through 13 sets of hands.
The Renouf try from the 92 final is one of my favourite memories. It doesn't happen today.
We need two things in this game more than ever: unpredictability and drama.
This rule means teams with majority possession win regardless of quality unless you define that with quick play-the-balls catching opponents offside constantly.
Do really watch the game for that? I don't. I'd rather sprawling backline moves, impossible offloads carrying 3 men, the occasional steal, and yes even the spectacular leaps for tries out wide. I also want the big hits, but maybe I'm asking too much now but most of all I want a contest undecided by early repeat sets that then blow games apart and have the referee play a huge part in the result.

 

[Waynesaurus]

It hasn't really fixed the wrestle either, its just all about above the ground now, hold the man up stop his progress, when the ref calls held knock him over. The 6 again calls have come from being slow on the ground.

 

[Smartseal]

I'd be curious as to the percentage of calls on tackle 1-3 as opposed to 4-6, cos it seems to me that there is a real reluctance to give 6 again late in the tackle count.

 

[ningnangnong]

I'm still at a loss as to how such a major rule change can be introduced AFTER the season has started?

Everyone has spent their pre-season working on the basis of the rules being the rules, and then these fuckin' eejits at NRL HQ just go and throw a curveball in there... how can you even take the game seriously when the rules are getting chopped and changed on a whim?

 

[Sproj]

I'm still at a loss as to how such a major rule change can be introduced AFTER the season has started?

Everyone has spent their pre-season working on the basis of the rules being the rules, and then these fuckin' eejits at NRL HQ just go and throw a curveball in there... how can you even take the game seriously when the rules are getting chopped and changed on a whim?

Only one team hasn't been able to adapt.