AndTheKungFoSing
New member
@westTAHger said:
I think they need to get rid of the exotics (like number of penalties for example).
Things you don't like about the game
- Thread starter AndTheKungFoSing
- Start date
I think they need to get rid of the exotics (like number of penalties for example).
jirskyr
Well-known member
@innsaneink said:
Do you think a cover tackler should be permitted to work over the attacker? Sounds more like prof foul territory. I would argue a line break deserves a quick play the ball and roll on.
mike
Well-known member
The biggest blight on the game IMO is the wrestling in the tackle. Can’t stand it, it’s not rugby league and the sooner they stamp it out the better. Let’s get back to basic tackling techniques and stop wrestling to slow down the play the ball. This will also remove the need for the “dominate” tackle rubbish…..
innsaneink
Well-known member
Not work over the ball carrier, just hold on while ref calls 'hold' 3 times….if he can get to his feet earlier and play it then so be it
Its all hypothetical stuff isnt it...imaginary, hard to say how it'd actually go without seeing it
Its all hypothetical stuff isnt it...imaginary, hard to say how it'd actually go without seeing it
A number of posts have referred to betting on matches. Whilst people should be able to place a bet if they wish, I agree that it is getting over the top and it is an area that needs to be strictly policed as much as possible to prevent any unethical influence on the outcome of games. It would be devastating to supporters and the game itself should gambling be in anyway capable of ruining the game we all support and follow.
tiger4ever
Active member
refs refereeing the same for origins ,test,semi finals would be good.5 MIN BIN for more then 2 warnings for slowing the play the ball down.
8 interchanges then down to 6 after a few years.
The bettings ok….if you dont like it dont bet.I dont
8 interchanges then down to 6 after a few years.
The bettings ok….if you dont like it dont bet.I dont
A
alien
Guest
@stryker said:
but if there was foul play against them then why shouldnt they get a penalty?
AndTheKungFoSing
New member
I really like the idea that the referees are paired from Round 1… this would help with consistency... i wonder if this has been considered?
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
Betting agencies will put markets up on anything as long as they can make a buck out of it. Markets such as who will be appointed the next coach at a particular club are stupid and should be banned. Nothing I love seeing more then betting agencies getting burnt, e.g the betting plunge on the Storm for the spoon last yr right before the news broke
Also the way Channel 9 treat the game with contempt is a joke. Still stuck in the dark ages by showing games on delay, and the amount of ad breaks is rediculous. There must have been 5 ad breaks during the GF entertainment. They are far too cocky and deserve to be wiped from the game. Then we wouldn't have to put up with the nausiating back and forth between Gus and Rabs
Also the way Channel 9 treat the game with contempt is a joke. Still stuck in the dark ages by showing games on delay, and the amount of ad breaks is rediculous. There must have been 5 ad breaks during the GF entertainment. They are far too cocky and deserve to be wiped from the game. Then we wouldn't have to put up with the nausiating back and forth between Gus and Rabs
A
alien
Guest
if the scores are equal at the end of 80 mins for a normal round game then 1 point to each club.
H
hymtly
Guest
@alien said:
Get rid of video ref, it's a waste of time.
1\. The Video Ref can stay, but should only be able to view footage in Normal (1x) speed. This is the same as traditional referees. Slowing the footage down brings in too many questions about seperation. If it looks like a try then its a try. Same goes for knock ons etc.
2\. The rule whereby a player puts his foot out into touch and catches the ball on the full deaming the kicker has kicked it out on the full. I think this is ridiculous and the player catching the ball should be deamed taking the ball over the line.
3\. Why dont touchies rule on forward passes? Everyone in the crowd can see them. Also the rule on the forward pass to be followed correctly. In my understanding, unless the rule has changed, it is how the ball travels out of the players hands. Not whether the ball floats/travels in a forward motion after seperation to the players hands.
4\. An innovation rather than a dislike. I would like to see a team be able to bring more than 4 subs to a match. Maybe 6, 7 or 8\. However they can only use a maximum of 4 indiviudal players during the game. This may bring another element of strategy into the back end of a game. Do we need to use more forwards or bring in some quicker players around the ruck. You could also reduce the number of interchanges. Also cover for unexpected injuries to players and gives more players exposure to FG.
I am sure there are more. Ask me again after Rd 1 2012…..
2\. The rule whereby a player puts his foot out into touch and catches the ball on the full deaming the kicker has kicked it out on the full. I think this is ridiculous and the player catching the ball should be deamed taking the ball over the line.
3\. Why dont touchies rule on forward passes? Everyone in the crowd can see them. Also the rule on the forward pass to be followed correctly. In my understanding, unless the rule has changed, it is how the ball travels out of the players hands. Not whether the ball floats/travels in a forward motion after seperation to the players hands.
4\. An innovation rather than a dislike. I would like to see a team be able to bring more than 4 subs to a match. Maybe 6, 7 or 8\. However they can only use a maximum of 4 indiviudal players during the game. This may bring another element of strategy into the back end of a game. Do we need to use more forwards or bring in some quicker players around the ruck. You could also reduce the number of interchanges. Also cover for unexpected injuries to players and gives more players exposure to FG.
I am sure there are more. Ask me again after Rd 1 2012…..
Marshall_magic
New member
Video refs should stay, but should have their powers restricted to:
-Knock ons
-Held up/grounded
-In/out of the field of play
-Double movements
Obstructions, onsides and foul play should be policed by the on field officials.
-Knock ons
-Held up/grounded
-In/out of the field of play
-Double movements
Obstructions, onsides and foul play should be policed by the on field officials.
Tigersmurf
Well-known member
The Wrestle!
happy_tiger
Well-known member
Channel 9 coverage
Laurie Daley
Ricky Stuart
Anyone associated with Manly
Referees
Rest I can live with (Most weeks anyway)
Laurie Daley
Ricky Stuart
Anyone associated with Manly
Referees
Rest I can live with (Most weeks anyway)
Some other ideas…
Once the ball leaves the field of play time should be called off. I came to watch 80 minutes of football, not 70 minutes and then a game of lets wind down the clock.
Agree the if a player catches the ball on the full from the kick off and has their foot in touch should be deemed as taking the ball into touch.
Bring back or enforce the voluntary tackle penalty. To many times last year we saw players taking voluntary tackles and no penalty being blown
I like the idea of having a 6 man bench but only allowing 4 to be used in the game. Adding to this if a teams player is taken out (and can not return) by an act of foul play resulting in a penalty then an additional sub can be used to replace that player on the bench.
Once the ball leaves the field of play time should be called off. I came to watch 80 minutes of football, not 70 minutes and then a game of lets wind down the clock.
Agree the if a player catches the ball on the full from the kick off and has their foot in touch should be deemed as taking the ball into touch.
Bring back or enforce the voluntary tackle penalty. To many times last year we saw players taking voluntary tackles and no penalty being blown
I like the idea of having a 6 man bench but only allowing 4 to be used in the game. Adding to this if a teams player is taken out (and can not return) by an act of foul play resulting in a penalty then an additional sub can be used to replace that player on the bench.
@Marshall_magic said:
I agree with this except I'm happy for video ref to rule on offsides coz that's usually black n white on reply.
In regard to grounding the ball for a try off kicks, I think the player should have to either grab the ball and be in control of it then put it down or touch the ball simultaneously with the ground. This is opposed to a player just putting his arms out and trying to bring the ball down with it. If the player touches the ball before the ground but doesn't have control of it it should not be a try. This would get rid of the stupid "was there separation rule" which is too ambiguous in a lot of cases. I hope u get what I mean lol
Marshall_magic
New member
@steve-o said:
The main thing I have with the video refs is, they can't be used for something that can happen 70m down field that results in a try. For me the onside/offside is the responsibility of the touch judge. Obstructions are the responsibility of the control and pocket refs.
I agree the separation rule is a joke. They need to watch the try in normal speed, you can tell there if they have proper control. Watch Foran's try in the grand final, there's no way he drops that. Other tries have been given that the player drops cold and a pinky stays on the ball so they give it. It's merely the refs trying to put a black and white rule in place on an area where you need to use common sense and judgement.
