Round 2 2013 NRL: Cronulla Sutherland Sharks v South Sydney Rabbitohs @ ANZ Stadium @ 7pm Monday 18th March

[Milkshark]

Read the rule book.

That rule is flawed.Once the ball goes up boths teams are attacking and defending, and not until either team catches the ball is it defined which team is actually defending and which is actually attacking. The postion of the field that the bomb/kick is put up should never come into play. If a team is running the ball out from their own goal line than that team is said to be attacking and the other team is obviously defending.

Also, there is no difference between an attacking team contesting the ball from their bomb and getting tackled mid air and the defending team being tackled mid air. They are both dangerous acts. How you can say one is more dangerous than the other is beyond me.

 

[BlackWhiteBlue]

That rule is flawed.Once the ball goes up boths teams are attacking and defending, and not until either team catches the ball is it defined which team is actually defending and which is actually attacking. The postion of the field that the bomb/kick is put up should never come into play. If a team is running the ball out from their own goal line than that team is said to be attacking and the other team is obviously defending.

Also, there is no difference between an attacking team contesting the ball from their bomb and getting tackled mid air and the defending team being tackled mid air. They are both dangerous acts. How you can say one is more dangerous than the other is beyond me.

Its still the ****ing rule mate. SO why bitch about us not getting a penalty for it.

The rule is fair, and it creates options, etc for the defence (team not kicking) they can either attack the ball, and potentially drop it, or they can hold back and tackle the attacking player. Nothing wrong with the rule at all in my eye.

 

[Milkshark]

Its still the ****ing rule mate. SO why bitch about us not getting a penalty for it.

The rule is fair, and it creates options, etc for the defence (team not kicking) they can either attack the ball, and potentially drop it, or they can hold back and tackle the attacking player. Nothing wrong with the rule at all in my eye.

No need for the language "mate".

 

[goodbyepenrithhellosharks]

Its still the ****ing rule mate. SO why bitch about us not getting a penalty for it.

The rule is fair, and it creates options, etc for the defence (team not kicking) they can either attack the ball, and potentially drop it, or they can hold back and tackle the attacking player. Nothing wrong with the rule at all in my eye.

what it does show though is rule makers are not really concerned about players health.
It does not matter who is attacking or defending,if a player is taken out while in the air he could be seriously hurt

 

[Born&bred]

There is a massive difference between the player defending a bomb compared to the chasing players that compete for it.

 

[goodbyepenrithhellosharks]

There is a massive difference between the player defending a bomb compared to the chasing players that compete for it.

beg to differ on this.An attacking player who is in the air can also jump from a standing start if the kick is not timed and he is there too early and once he jumps what is the difference if a defending player makes the tackle
lol does that make sense

 

[Born&bred]

beg to differ on this.An attacking player who is in the air can also jump from a standing start if the kick is not timed and he is there too early and once he jumps what is the difference if a defending player makes the tackle
lol does that make sense

Not quite lol

The big difference is the defending player has limited to no opportunity to get himself in a "safe" position to contest it, but most importantly, he has to try and catch it.

The attacking player often has friends to contest it & has far more choices that protect his safety.

Put yourself in the position where you're the only one that can catch and diffuse this, but 5 really big guys are running at you drooling saliva...

 

[goodbyepenrithhellosharks]

Not quite lol

The big difference is the defending player has limited to no opportunity to get himself in a "safe" position to contest it, but most importantly, has to try and catch it.

The attacking player often has friends to contest it & has far more choices that protect his safety.

understand what your saying in this case but if an attacking player gets there early and a full back comes from say 10 metres away to contest it, the roles are reversed...thats my last shot and I will leave it at that

 

[Born&bred]

understand what your saying in this case but if an attacking player gets there early and a full back comes from say 10 metres away to contest it, the roles are reversed...thats my last shot and I will leave it at that

Yeah fair enough - but the attacking player is a dumb ***** if he allows that situation to occur - he has all the advantage

 

[Bundy Shark]

I get what you are both saying & understand your argument but if I can stick my beak in for 30 seconds, a defender catching the ball will more than likely get injured more than a attacking player catching the ball but at the end of the day they can still be hurt equally as bad from the same type of outcome/tackle. (cheers in advance for giving my thread the time of day).

 

[Thresher]

plenty of wingers dive across the line with their bodies parallel to the ground, they might be in the air but you've got to be able to take those ****ers out

same with an attacking player taking a bomb in your ingoal, there's just no way you could train footy players to wait until he lands so that they can then pick him up and carry him over the sideline, the instinct is to stop him putting that ball on the ground