Missed conversions - how it cost us

[Mark^Bastard]

Reddit hey, I see you're a man of culture also

I don't usually go there for footy but it looks like a much less toxic place than the other places I contribute to, so it's very tempting.

 

[Milkshark]

I don't usually go there for footy but it looks like a much less toxic place than the other places I contribute to, so it's very tempting.

Me either but there is some good footy stuff in there sometimes

 

[Mark^Bastard]

Advantage should never go past a completed tackle in any game. People bring up Union, we're not Union.

What if it's the first tackle and they're really dominating to the point they're almost definitely going to score? Giving the penalty could actually hurt the attacking team by removing momentum.

The 6 again call they trialled during the all stars game a few years back is a way to resolve this.

 

[HaroldBishop]

What if it's the first tackle and they're really dominating to the point they're almost definitely going to score? Giving the penalty could actually hurt the attacking team by removing momentum.

The 6 again call they trialled during the all stars game a few years back is a way to resolve this.

The 6 again is fine as it happens at the time of infringement, that's not really advantage.

 

[Milkshark]

What if it's the first tackle and they're really dominating to the point they're almost definitely going to score? Giving the penalty could actually hurt the attacking team by removing momentum.

The 6 again call they trialled during the all stars game a few years back is a way to resolve this.

Thats why they should let the entire set play out to see what happens.

Blowing a penalty is what the other team wants, what they dont want is for play to keep going.

Let them play.

 

[Milkshark]

The 6 again is fine as it happens at the time of infringement, that's not really advantage.

Blowing the penalty and stopping play is taking advantage away from the attacking team that did something good to get the other team on the back foot.

 

[HaroldBishop]

Blowing the penalty and stopping play is taking advantage away from the attacking team that did something good to get the other team on the back foot.

So use the bin. Letting a team play out the entire set is stupid imo.

 

[Milkshark]

So use the bin. Letting a team play out the entire set is stupid imo.

Why is that stupid?

They worked for that advantage and should be given opportunity to score off it.

 

[Mark^Bastard]

The 6 again is fine as it happens at the time of infringement, that's not really advantage.

I'm saying that they trialled giving 6 again instead of blowing a penalty for defensive penalties where the attacking team has momentum. It removes the ability to kick for touch or a conversion. I think it's a great idea but there's some things to work out obviously.

I'd prefer penalties to be about foul play including professional fouls rather than being offside or not square at marker and the minor infringements result in 6 again calls. The better defensive teams are too strategic around giving away penalties. They thrive on the structure that penalties award them.

 

[BurgoShark]

I know but when does it ever happen, apart from yesterday?

Almost never. It’s the rule though. I don’t think anyone can argue that this is not the right call. All we can argue is that the NRL is inconsistent in their application of some rules .. which should be news to nobody.

 

[HaroldBishop]

I'm saying that they trialled giving 6 again instead of blowing a penalty for defensive penalties where the attacking team has momentum. It removes the ability to kick for touch or a conversion. I think it's a great idea but there's some things to work out obviously.

I'd prefer penalties to be about foul play including professional fouls rather than being offside or not square at marker and the minor infringements result in 6 again calls. The better defensive teams are too strategic around giving away penalties. They thrive on the structure that penalties award them.

Yeah I know all of that. I didn't mind it at the time.

I still think they should use the bin more. It's weak they don't because it's so obvious.

Almost never. It’s the rule though. I don’t think anyone can argue that this is not the right call. All we can argue is that the NRL is inconsistent in their application of some rules .. which should be news to nobody.

True

 

[Mark^Bastard]

I still think they should use the bin more. It's weak they don't because it's so obvious.

In a perfect world where refs were good maybe. But they're pretty bad and pretty biased so I hate that. It'll lead to too much focus on calls.

Teams try to get away with rubbish. They try to get away with slowing down the ruck because it's a game of attrition. The punishment for this needs to be an attrition based punishment, to the point where they don't want to try the rubbish any more because it ceases to be a good tactic. At the moment it's something coaches are making part of their game plan because the 'penalty' isn't that bad for their team.

 

[HaroldBishop]

In a perfect world where refs were good maybe. But they're pretty bad and pretty biased so I hate that. It'll lead to too much focus on calls.

Teams try to get away with rubbish. They try to get away with slowing down the ruck because it's a game of attrition. The punishment for this needs to be an attrition based punishment, to the point where they don't want to try the rubbish any more because it ceases to be a good tactic. At the moment it's something coaches are making part of their game plan because the 'penalty' isn't that bad for their team.

This and wrestling in the ruck are the two things I detest more then anything atm. It really does detract from the experience.

 

[Mark^Bastard]

This and wrestling in the ruck are the two things I detest more then anything atm. It really does detract from the experience.

Yep agreed. Excessive wrestling leading to a tackle count restart would be gold too. Because it's less jarring than a penalty they could blow it more.

 

[bort]

Yep agreed. Excessive wrestling leading to a tackle count restart would be gold too. Because it's less jarring than a penalty they could blow it more.

Say they implemented that ruck garbage attracted a ref waving the arm and shouting 'ruck infringement, 6 again' how often am I, as the grubby defensive player, going to be better of carrying on with it to force a penalty?
In some circumstances defender would literally get a choice if they felt 'play on, six again' or penalty was better for them. Even if they have cleared the ruck by the time call is made they can just interfere with the play the ball if they want to force it to a penalty.

Or would it jump straight from less than a penalty (6 again) to a sin bin?
That opens up scenario where tackled player is getting away with some garbage of their own, or milking, and gets a player sin binned instead of penalised.

In principle I like the idea, just depending on how it is implemented it may be able to be taken advantage of.

 

[Mark^Bastard]

I am 100% for more things being called professional fouls.

Like, you start by presuming they're doing it on accident or somewhat negligently and give the 6 again call. If it looks like anyone is EVER giving a penalty in a purposeful and tactical way, it should be a professional foul. I mean it already is but they only call it out when it's holding down too long when a team doesn't have their defence set. But really lighter professional fouls have become part of the defensive fabric of the game.

It's also annoying to me that teams are exploiting the change to the strip rule.

 

[Greg86]

The strip rule is so hard to call because it’s a split second some drops off and the ball played at.
High risk play and the referee is made to make another call, having more involvement.

 

[Steve Kneen]

Round 14 vs Canberra
22-20 loss
2 from 4

Round 15 vs bulldogs
14-12 loss
0 from 3

Round 16 vs broncos
24-22 loss
1 from 5

Round 24 vs raiders
15-14 loss
0 from 3

Cost us 8 points top 4

The administrators of rugby league are poor and lack feel for the game, hence we get people like Greenberg(politically correct) and Beattie-(a washed up Labor lefty politician with no idea about the game)("JJ Gillitan"). A try should have far more weight than the current difference of only 2 between a conversion goal/penalty and a try.

NFL touchdown 6, Rugby Union 5, only NRL has its head in the sand.

Not only should the reform be made where a try should be worth 5 or maybe even 6 points which would make the game far more exciting, Golden Point is a joke and a farce and it should be scrapped. It isn't played in semi finals, finals, Grand finals unless it's still deadlocked after extra time, so why is it played in regular season, it's a total contradiction in terms. You either have 5 mins each way or have a draw in regular season games, it shouldn't be one rule for the regular season and another rule come finals time. Not allowing a side to have the opportunity to respond to the field goal a-thon is farcical and blatantly unfair as far as sport goes.

In the above 4 games if a try had been worth 5, Cronulla would have lost 25-24 against the Raiders in Round 14, or it would have been 28-28 in the case where a try was 6, lost 16-15 v Canterbury-(18-18 in the case of 6 for a try), lost 28-27 v Brisbane-(32-32 in the case of 6 for a try), and it would have been 17-17 v Canberra(Cronulla 20-19 in the case of 6 for a try). Of course with the closeness of the scores and a try being 5, and/or 6 in those games it would have changed the complexity of the game, but quite definitely a try should have far more weight than it currently does. Unfortunately the people that run the game of Rugby League have no vision and no lateral thinking. Tries are what people want to see, not goal kicking or field goal athons deciding games.

 

[Mark^Bastard]

How good's this economy Steve Kneen? Having the LNP in power has worked wonders. Is Milk less than $10/L yet?

 

[slide rule]

**** Labor. 4 points for a try when we should be getting 5.

Lefty Commie bastards!!!