Obstruction

ImageImageImage
Post Reply
User avatar
the third
Member
Member
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed 01 Sep, 2010 10:55 pm
Location: here and there

Obstruction

Post by the third » Thu 28 Mar, 2013 11:45 pm

Farah slams new NRL obstruction rules By By Steve Jancetic AAP Thu 28th March, 11:04pm Share Print Decrease Font Increase Font RSS Wests Tigers skipper Robbie Farah claims defenders are using the new obstruction rule as a cop-out to prevent tries, adding that NRL teams would soon be forced to change the way the game was played. The Tigers were livid when denied what could have been a crucial try to Tim Moltzen during their 26-0 loss to Manly on Thursday night. The score was 14-0 when Moltzen was called back, with Chris Lawrence running into opposite centre Jamie Lyon inside from where the Tigers fullback went over. The obstruction rule has caused plenty of consternation over the opening few rounds of the season, with new referees boss Daniel Anderson having insisted on a zero tolerance policy to decoy runners coming in contact with defenders. "Players are using it as a cop-out," Farah said when asked about the rule. "You've got players in the defensive line just getting hit and then straight away putting their hands up, using it as a cop-out. "They're trying to make it a black and white rule but you can't. "I thought we were making progress at the start of the year. We just seem to have gone backwards." Asked if he would go down if a decoy runner came at him near the tryline, Farah said: "After seeing tonight, bloody oath." The NSW Origin rake claimed the new interpretation would change the way the game was played. "We almost can't run second-man plays anymore down near the line - it's getting that ridiculous," he said. "I just can't understand how and why they're ruling it this wrong. "The one last week in the Melbourne game, the Cooper Cronk try - that was just absurd. That's a try every day of the week." Lyon offered a sheepish smile when asked about his recollection of the incident. Asked if he outsmarted the Tigers, Lyon said: "I don't know about that. I fell over - he ran into me."

Sorry cant get the link but its nrl.com.au

Posted using RoarFEED 2013


tig_prmz
Member
Member
Posts: 7947
Joined: Sat 03 Oct, 2009 10:32 pm

Post by tig_prmz » Thu 28 Mar, 2013 11:47 pm

there is gonna be a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooon debate on this piece of crap rule.
My Round 1 Team 2018

1. lolo 2. noffa 3. suli 4. milne 5. fonua
6. reynolds 7. brooks
8. packer 9. ET 10. Twal
11. McQuen 12. Lawrence 13. Eiso
14. Matulino 15. McIllwrick 16. Sue 17. Aloiai
18. Marsters 19. Benji 20. Grant 21. K Naiqama
Next: Liddle, MCK, Felise, MWZ, Thompson, Rochow, Gamble

tigerbalm
Member
Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: Sun 19 Feb, 2012 7:32 pm

Post by tigerbalm » Thu 28 Mar, 2013 11:49 pm

Adds to my frustration of events tonight.

Posted using RoarFEED 2013

Demonborger
Member
Member
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri 09 Oct, 2009 3:26 pm

Post by Demonborger » Thu 28 Mar, 2013 11:49 pm

NRL rule set needs massive reworking and they need to shut down betting ties. Way too stop start, way too much influence from the refs. I normally hate it but watched some of the Richmond Carlton AFL game and i can see the appeal of a simple rule set.

tig_prmz
Member
Member
Posts: 7947
Joined: Sat 03 Oct, 2009 10:32 pm

Post by tig_prmz » Thu 28 Mar, 2013 11:55 pm

they didnt point out the DCE no try that anasta milked
My Round 1 Team 2018

1. lolo 2. noffa 3. suli 4. milne 5. fonua
6. reynolds 7. brooks
8. packer 9. ET 10. Twal
11. McQuen 12. Lawrence 13. Eiso
14. Matulino 15. McIllwrick 16. Sue 17. Aloiai
18. Marsters 19. Benji 20. Grant 21. K Naiqama
Next: Liddle, MCK, Felise, MWZ, Thompson, Rochow, Gamble


Oxygen
Member
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu 28 Mar, 2013 10:02 pm

Post by Oxygen » Thu 28 Mar, 2013 11:56 pm

A complete joke It's gone from bad to worse , Manly certainly did their homework on the rule and exploited it.

User avatar
the third
Member
Member
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed 01 Sep, 2010 10:55 pm
Location: here and there

Post by the third » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 12:00 am

Either it needs to be said second man plays are penalised or there needs to be shades of grey. Would hate to see the big stick brought out for this. Lol

Posted using RoarFEED 2013

Demonborger
Member
Member
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri 09 Oct, 2009 3:26 pm

Post by Demonborger » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 12:05 am

THe reason why Anderson decided on it was because teams (such as the Dogs) would run a person into the defensive line and stop the defense from sliding, causing the defender on the outside of the dummy runner attacking player to be force into continuing to slide or watch the inside.

The way to fix it would be to tell all clubs that dummy runners have to run completely through the defensive line and then work on a test to determine who is at fault if this fails to happen, projected running path or something.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 39017
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 12:11 am

Funny how other sides can run second man plans without having issues Robbie

I don't understand why the decoys just don't hit the turf soon as they have played their part , the ball is usually past by the time they are getting close to the defender and no one can say they have interfered with a defender if they are laying flat on their bellies

The first obstruction when it was called when tedesco almost scored in the 1st half was definitely wrong

Lyon had followed Lawrence inside and just made a bad read

I think the best cure for this is simple , if the defender claims obstruction and it isn't give him 10 in the bin Much like the faking it rule in football

User avatar
innsaneink
Member
Member
Posts: 27520
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....

Post by innsaneink » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 12:16 am

Its very difficult for there to be no contact at all when teams are attacking 10m out from the opposition tryline

This will kill attacking plays and see the kick to the corner be favoured.......its all too hard for them so just attempt to wipe it out altogether

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 39017
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 12:23 am

innsaneink wrote:Its very difficult for there to be no contact at all when teams are attacking 10m out from the opposition tryline

This will kill attacking plays and see the kick to the corner be favoured.......its all too hard for them so just attempt to wipe it out altogether
Yeah , but it is common sense Ink with many obstruction calls and why referees can't see it is appalling really

90% of obstructions if they apply common sense are easy calls

Like the one I mentioned above , the defender is literally following the decoy inside and the ball goes outside after before Lyon makes contact with Rowdy No brainer really

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 39017
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 12:32 am

The other thing I've always wondered about is this ??

Is there any way we could use a timing aspect to all of this ??

So for example , the player get past a level when an inside pass or kick is taken away because the decoy is offside

So then we time the amount of time it takes for the attacker to make contact with the defender

So when the defender makes a decision if he hasn't made it by a certain timeframe he becomes null and void especially in frame by frame pictures he seems to be anchoring or bracing for impact

If the attacker hasn't then altered his line it then could be deemed play on

With the technology at hand getting a frame by frame analysis of players body movements and reaction can't be this hard

User avatar
Black'n'White
Member
Member
Posts: 1881
Joined: Sat 02 Mar, 2013 6:52 pm

Post by Black'n'White » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 2:17 am

happy tiger wrote:The other thing I've always wondered about is this ??

Is there any way we could use a timing aspect to all of this ??

So for example , the player get past a level when an inside pass or kick is taken away because the decoy is offside

So then we time the amount of time it takes for the attacker to make contact with the defender

So when the defender makes a decision if he hasn't made it by a certain timeframe he becomes null and void especially in frame by frame pictures he seems to be anchoring or bracing for impact

If the attacker hasn't then altered his line it then could be deemed play on

With the technology at hand getting a frame by frame analysis of players body movements and reaction can't be this hard
Thats seems like way too much common sense for the NRL to implement.

User avatar
Swordy
Member
Member
Posts: 1794
Joined: Fri 02 Jul, 2010 9:34 pm

Post by Swordy » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 7:43 am

Whenever you play grubs like Manly, this will happen. Jamie Lyon and Hodges at the Broncos is another that boils my hide. They deliberately play to exploit rules which is not what the game is about in my opinion.

If you are good enough, get up there and tackle your man. If you aren't good enough, fake injury, fake getting run into, confront and intimidate the referee. That's why I dont like it. I know all sides do it but some are bigger grubs than others, and Manly would have to be the top. Coaching to cheat is a grub act and cowardly.
Sunshine Coast resident.
Tigers fan since birth in 1969.
Fond memories of Leichhardt Oval every home game as a kid with my Dad!

User avatar
TIGER
Member
Member
Posts: 3019
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 10:40 am

Post by TIGER » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 9:52 am

How about this, if the player obstructed is clearly not going to have any effect on the guy why scores the try, they give the try.
Only when a defender has a genuine chance of being in position to make a tackle on the eventual try scorer is denied that opportunity, the try should be disallowed.
Too many tries being taken away because a guy who is nowhere near the eventual try scorer and had no chance of stopping the try gets ran into by a decoy runner. Its bloody stupid!

User avatar
wtfl1981
Member
Member
Posts: 2243
Joined: Mon 30 Aug, 2010 7:54 pm
Location: Western Suburbs
Contact:

Post by wtfl1981 » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 10:26 am

I find the technical oversight over obstruction very annoying. They only police it when its around the try line.

Posted using RoarFEED 2013
WESTS TIGERS FOR LIFE!

Image

User avatar
innsaneink
Member
Member
Posts: 27520
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....

Post by innsaneink » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 10:53 am

Swordy wrote:Whenever you play grubs like Manly, this will happen. Jamie Lyon and Hodges at the Broncos is another that boils my hide. They deliberately play to exploit rules which is not what the game is about in my opinion.

If you are good enough, get up there and tackle your man. If you aren't good enough, fake injury, fake getting run into, confront and intimidate the referee. That's why I dont like it. I know all sides do it but some are bigger grubs than others, and Manly would have to be the top. Coaching to cheat is a grub act and cowardly.
Exploiting the rules and cheating is different imo

Farahs said he'd do it himself....if you cant beat em....join em.

Making the finals for the last eight seasons straight and winning two comps tells me theyre good enough

User avatar
Snodgrass
Member
Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed 09 Mar, 2011 11:54 am
Location: Woy Woy hinterland

Post by Snodgrass » Fri 29 Mar, 2013 5:37 pm

This is becoming a total mess.
How about turning it upside down and giving the attacking side a smidge of parity by penalizing defensive players who lay a hand on decoy runners. Can you imagine ? Mayhem. Every player will soon be running around with both hands in the air trying to convine the officials they were nowhere near the ball-less collision.

Seriously though, it has the potential to turn the game into a far more two dimensional version of what we've been watching in recent years. And sadly with our lack of grunt up the guts, this does us no favors whatsoever ... we'll be left just flinging it side to side and relying on the kick.

Why was all this so easy years ago ? I think Gould has it right when he says it's an instinct not a capital 'R' regulation. You just get an instantaneous sense on every individual case of whether it's obstruction or not. And ref's years ago seemed quite adept at sensing all this pretty well.
. Please Note ... The somewhat garbled opinion reproduced above is not the work of former Western Suburbs, Newtown and Parramatta second rower Warren Snodgrass.

Post Reply