NFL defensive wall used with field goal attempt

There was a rule change that happened because of the Parra wall. I remember that Wests forwards did the same thing , and smashed the wall at
Lidcombe. It only lasted about another week or two after that.
Actually it may have been something with the spirit of the game , but I'm not 100% sure, but it was stopped . I think it was as much the fear of someone being injured in the wall , as it was about being completely unfair
 
If the 'Wall' is set prior to the PTB, it is a fair contest and the players do not have any responsibility to move [they cant disappear].

But if the 'Wall' was created in an attacking formation moving towards the Defensive Line, this could be considered obstruction if any contact is initiated by the attacking team.

Warriors vs Easts… Who Cares!
 
Wouldn't the wall constitute a sleeper?

According to the NRL Rules

Sleeper
An attacking player who loiters next to the play the ball area and who causes an obstruction will be penalised

There's no way they should have given that. It really makes you wonder what goes through the heads of referees sometimes…
 
@Fraze23 said:
Wouldn't the wall constitute a sleeper?

According to the NRL Rules

Sleeper
An attacking player who loiters next to the play the ball area and who causes an obstruction will be penalised

There's no way they should have given that. It really makes you wonder what goes through the heads of referees sometimes…

It will be lucky if it lasts another week
 
Tony Archer has officially given it the green light, but did say "under the current rules" so maybe he's expecting a change.
Also said that the Souths try should have been disallowed for obstruction, which I think is absolutely ridiculous.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_
 
@Tiger Watto said:
If the 'Wall' is set prior to the PTB, it is a fair contest and the players do not have any responsibility to move [they cant disappear].

But if the 'Wall' was created in an attacking formation moving towards the Defensive Line, this could be considered obstruction if any contact is initiated by the attacking team.

Warriors vs Easts… Who Cares!

Every team should care.
 
@VanillaThunder said:
Tony Archer has officially given it the green light, but did say "under the current rules" so maybe he's expecting a change.
Also said that the Souths try should have been disallowed for obstruction, which I think is absolutely ridiculous.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

Come on VT - Cause it wasn't a try. Every time Souffs score the try should be taken off them. LOL
 
@VanillaThunder said:
Tony Archer has officially given it the green light, but did say "under the current rules" so maybe he's expecting a change.
Also said that the Souths try should have been disallowed for obstruction, which I think is absolutely ridiculous.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

It and isn't ridiculous. It is ridiculous in as much as it isn't really obstruction but the rules as they stand are clear and we had a try disallowed against Canberra for essentially the same reason. Souths have had a few dubious tries awarded in circumstances where other teams have had them disallowed.
 
@Yossarian said:
@VanillaThunder said:
Tony Archer has officially given it the green light, but did say "under the current rules" so maybe he's expecting a change.
Also said that the Souths try should have been disallowed for obstruction, which I think is absolutely ridiculous.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

It and isn't ridiculous. It is ridiculous in as much as it isn't really obstruction but the rules as they stand are clear and we had a try disallowed against Canberra for essentially the same reason. Souths have had a few dubious tries awarded in circumstances where other teams have had them disallowed.

Can't argue with that, it's just a shame that the rule is in place and could cost a team a game (like us), much like this wall could be a game-changer in certain situations. Consistency is nice and all, but I'd still like to see some common sense.
 
BRING BACK THE WALL… No better sight in RL at Penalty Tap Restarts with wall formations and the Hooker scheming behind it.

Used to take up 30min at training every week.

CLASSIC RUGBY LEAGUE!!!
 
@Tiger Watto said:
BRING BACK THE WALL… No better sight in RL at Penalty Tap Restarts with wall formations and the Hooker scheming behind it.

Used to take up 30min at training every week.

CLASSIC RUGBY LEAGUE!!!

Only took 30 minutes because the half backs spent 25 minutes making sure their hair was right and it took 5 minutes to get the props to face the right direction and teach them their lefts from rights
 
as predicted, the NRL referees (tony archer) has deemed the play perfectly legal as long as they dont intentionally impede opposition players
 
NRL deems Warriors wall legal
05:40 AEST Wed Jun 17 2015

Queensland and NSW have been cleared to employ the "Warriors wall" in State of Origin II on Wednesday after NRL officials deemed it legal. The Warriors lined up five players beside the play the ball as Shaun Johnson steadied for a shot at field goal against the Sydney Roosters on Saturday. Roosters players complained they had been obstructed by the wall of defenders as they attempted to shut down the Warriors halfback, who slotted the one-pointer to level the scores. However, NRL referees boss Tony Archer said the block play was legal under the existing rules because no defending player was impeded.

"As long as they line up behind the point of the play the ball and they don't obstruct any of the players coming through to defend, it is a legal tactic under the current rules," Archer said in his weekly address on the NRL website. Under the rules, players from the attacking team can line up anywhere, as long as they are behind the play the ball.

NSW coach Laurie Daley and his Queensland counterpart Mal Meninga would have been paying close attention after the tactic was utilised successfully by the Warriors. Origin I was decided by a Cooper Cronk field goal and the Warriors have proved the wall highly effective.
 

Latest posts

Staff online

Back
Top