changes to the instruction rule question

gosharkies

Bull Shark
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
1,936
Reaction score
9
do you think the changes to the obstruction rule will be good for the sharks or do you think other teams will get more of advantage than us from it?
 
Joined
May 17, 2010
Messages
27,652
Reaction score
144
Location
NSW
do you think the changes to the obstruction rule will be good for the sharks or do you think other teams will get more of advantage than us from it?

Not really cos we drop the ball every time we run a play anyway
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2010
Messages
8,234
Reaction score
170
Location
Sutherland Shire
Not trying to be funny but I dont think it will affect us to much when we have the ball, we rarely run try scoring plays where decoys are involved unless you count the play where Morris or De gois step across at dummy half & turn it back to Fifita close to the tryline.
 

Gards

Jaws
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
17,066
Reaction score
720
Location
At the Tucky
Is that the instruction rule to not score too many tries?

No that's not it. He doesn't cap how many tries we can score just as long as they are through props or backrowers. The wings are allowed one a piece per season. Ever wonder why Mills got dropped??? :D Once Jono gets a try he will be skating on thin ice with the coach
 

Rapture_Shark

Oceanic Whitetip Shark
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
821
Reaction score
7
Location
Lismore
i think in general, the rule should be changed slightly, i think that if the defender commits himself to the runner without it majorly affecting play then it shouldnt be an obstruction.
 

stevekneen10

Tiger Shark
Joined
Mar 26, 2011
Messages
1,242
Reaction score
8
Location
Central West NSW
No that's not it. He doesn't cap how many tries we can score just as long as they are through props or backrowers. The wings are allowed one a piece per season. Ever wonder why Mills got dropped??? :D Once Jono gets a try he will be skating on thin ice with the coach

The ice is looking fairly thick atm...
 

DeathMoth

Great White
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
3,548
Reaction score
42
Location
Sydney
i think in general, the rule should be changed slightly, i think that if the defender commits himself to the runner without it majorly affecting play then it shouldnt be an obstruction.

I agree that part of the rule should put the onus on the defender. While the decoy shouldn't be allowed to overtly physically impede a defender, the whole point of running a decoy is to confuse the defender and get them to make the wrong choice. If a defender initiates contact and/or if the defender moves across to make contact with a decoy then the attacking player shouldn't be ruled to have been at fault. The attacking player should be seen to be attempting to run through a gap in the line, or attempting to pull up before the line.

The ruling in its current state rewards defenders who make the wrong call hence encouraging unsportsmanlike behaviours such as diving and it penalises teams who work hard at running advanced attacking structures and plays. Whichever way you look at it, it's bad for the game and whoever came up with the idea is a cock head.
 
Top