Official Wade Graham

Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
10,817
Reaction score
1,273
Location
Perth WA
nah, cant get behind that

id flick the challenge, but the bunker should be able to intervene when the ref makes a shocker
I’d be happy with that.

But then again based on the bunkers past performances that might be just as big an issue
 

Sharkpark

Hammerhead
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
441
Reaction score
47
Location
Tokyo, Japan
Probably even worse given some of the bunker blunders.
At least the ref is trying to make a live call with imperfect info - bunker makes far more screw ups than it has any right to
That's the most infuriating thing.
I'd get rid of the bunker altogether and keep the Captain's Challenge only in try scoring situations (succesful keep it, otherwise tough luck).
Let the ref make the call and be done with it. He's human, so are the players. No need to over analyze a bad call when you get players dropping the ball like it's a bar of wet soap.

Back to Wade, hopefully he doesn't take Wilton's spot again next year.
 
Joined
May 17, 2010
Messages
27,673
Reaction score
163
Location
NSW
I agree with what you are saying here. Half that outgrew the position and moved to 13 could have been a difference-maker.

The notation that the game is actually "faster" has been well and truly debunked though. It was just a con-job by the NRL.

There was a massive peak for "ball in play" time during the first 6-10 weeks after Covid, which created the perception of more footy being played and therefore we must be doing stuff faster- but it came back down by the end of the year. Each year we get these same peaks of ball in play at the back end of each year and during the finals, when the refs put their whistles away, which again creates the same perception. You get more "football being played" because there are less stoppages. For every 6-again you get 20-30 seconds of game time instead of a stoppage - or more if the attacking team could have taken the 2.

Mapped across the eras you referred to, the game is not faster in any measurable way. It some ways it is measurably slower. E.g. Scrums take 3x as long these days as they did in the 90's and early 2000's, and the average play the ball speed for the last 3 seasons has been slightly slower than it was in 2018.
Its faster in the way off less stoppage, more momentum. Not stopping every few plays for a kick to touch. Thats what im talking about. Play makers have the ball in hand a lot more than they did in the wrestle era, this is fact. A 13 with ball playing skills is becoming increasingly valuable.
 

snowman

Total gronk
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
57,319
Reaction score
1,007
Location
In your head, rent free
Yep keep them well out of it thanks. They'll start looking at more and more things and just slow the game down.

Tries only.
yeh mad, and when the ref penalises a play the ball when it was a knock on every fucker and their dog would be blowing up

cant remove the bunkers involvement
 
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
48,621
Reaction score
2,705
Location
Sydney
yeh mad, and when the ref penalises a play the ball when it was a knock on every fucker and their dog would be blowing up

cant remove the bunkers involvement
Yep, people will whinge and that's fine but it's by far the lesser of two evils.

We need less bunker involvement, not more.
 

Flanno

Great White
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
3,650
Reaction score
348
People whinge with the bunker and they’ll whinge without it.
 

andrew's_sharks

Great White
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
3,664
Reaction score
290
Location
Melbourne
Personally outside of scoring tries I would not have the bunker involved at all. People are human, make a call, accept it and quickly move on. I would also limit the amount of questioning a team does. It should literally be make the call, accept it and continue playing, with no further stopages.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
10,817
Reaction score
1,273
Location
Perth WA
nah, cant get behind that

id flick the challenge, but the bunker should be able to intervene when the ref makes a shocker
intervene when the ref makes a shocker”

This is the key.

Don’t allow the bunker to get involved or rule on bees dick touches or the ever slightest of bobbles. That’s for the on field ref at normal speed to call.
If you can’t see it with the naked eye, then it’s play on.

BUT, if the on field ref misses a blatant at normal speed (are your eyes painted on ref) decision, that is when the bunker should be allowed to assist.

just my opinion.
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
9,747
Reaction score
1,338
Its faster in the way off less stoppage, more momentum. Not stopping every few plays for a kick to touch.
There are not less total stoppages. There are less stoppages with the clock running.

3 years worth of fiddling has given us 1 minute of extra "ball in play" and 8 more play the balls per game, with several more minutes of dead time (mostly the video ref doing something - but also other "stop the clock" situations like last 5 minutes, HIA, etc.).

Total game duration went down in 2019 when they reduced the scrum and drop-out clocks. It stayed fairly consistent in 2020 and 2021, but 2022 was above 2019. 6-again rule changed nothing.

1667950045899.png

1667952530714.png


Play makers have the ball in hand a lot more than they did in the wrestle era, this is fact.
Not true at all. Combining 1, 6, 7 and 9 they are not getting significantly more touches than they were before the rule changes. One more minute of game time and 8 more ptb's doesn't change much.


1667950950692.png

The biggest influence the 6-again has had is have LESS passes per game and a lot MORE one pass hit ups.


A 13 with ball playing skills is becoming increasingly valuable.
Depends on how you want to play I guess. I love a ball-playing lock, but not everyone plays that way, and there is nothing to show that locks are doing any more passing than before.

1667953011397.png


Throwing more passes certainly wasn't a league-wide trend in 2020 and 2021 - though I haven't seen anything for this from 2022. The biggest measurable influence of the set restart rule was decreasing the amount of passes thrown in games AND increasing the amount of 1-pass hit ups. Any extra ball in play time is pretty much just a guarantee that you will see more hit ups.

Ratio of pass-to-run.

1667952134216.png


Percentage of plays which were one-pass runs.

1667951266661.png
 

Attachments

  • 1667952837147.png
    1667952837147.png
    6.3 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:

Rob

Bronze Whaler
Joined
Aug 12, 2021
Messages
246
Reaction score
126
I’m a fan of if the balls out of play then stop the clock, into touch, drop outs, try’s scored etc etc.

Also my pet hate is penalties for crusher tackles, always comes down to a 50/50 calls and players staying down.
I can’t recall any serious intentional ones for a long time.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
23,325
Reaction score
2,057
Location
IN A BAR
Personally outside of scoring tries I would not have the bunker involved at all. People are human, make a call, accept it and quickly move on. I would also limit the amount of questioning a team does. It should literally be make the call, accept it and continue playing, with no further stopages.
Other times bunker is involved is
Foul play that was missed or that the ref wants more feedback on
Dead in goal scenarios
Challenges

I get that not everyone likes the challenges but the other two are pretty minimal time impact.
Have I missed any?

Personally it's very much bunker mistakes which I have a greater issue with, but I guess the less it is used the less chance for mistakes... not sure restricting them to try situations only is ideal though.

Pausing the game even just for a moment to put a player on report for foul play identified by the bunker but then not awarding a penalty or any other benefit seems like a waste of time. Bunker should just be able to note things for MRC unless they deem it bad enough to penalise or bin retrospectively. They could keep using the bunker here without all the stoppages.

I think I'd like the challenge more if we got a couple more right. I don't mind that much strategically using it for a breather even, or gambling it because winning would be a huge momentum swing but we've had some shockers.
In saying that it is very easy to be critical of the call from the couch after the replays vs what the player actually sees live and has shouted at them by teammates who want to believe it was a strip.
At the moment I could take or leave the challenge... I think I'd prefer not to have it but I'm not that fussed by it. Maybe after another season or two NRL should look crunch how many calls players are getting corrected, how many challenges are being used likely just to get a breather and make a call on if the benefit of more correct outcomes is worth it or not in their eyes.
 

andrew's_sharks

Great White
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
3,664
Reaction score
290
Location
Melbourne
Other times bunker is involved is
Foul play that was missed or that the ref wants more feedback on
Dead in goal scenarios
Challenges

I get that not everyone likes the challenges but the other two are pretty minimal time impact.
Have I missed any?

Personally it's very much bunker mistakes which I have a greater issue with, but I guess the less it is used the less chance for mistakes... not sure restricting them to try situations only is ideal though.

Pausing the game even just for a moment to put a player on report for foul play identified by the bunker but then not awarding a penalty or any other benefit seems like a waste of time. Bunker should just be able to note things for MRC unless they deem it bad enough to penalise or bin retrospectively. They could keep using the bunker here without all the stoppages.

I think I'd like the challenge more if we got a couple more right. I don't mind that much strategically using it for a breather even, or gambling it because winning would be a huge momentum swing but we've had some shockers.
In saying that it is very easy to be critical of the call from the couch after the replays vs what the player actually sees live and has shouted at them by teammates who want to believe it was a strip.
At the moment I could take or leave the challenge... I think I'd prefer not to have it but I'm not that fussed by it. Maybe after another season or two NRL should look crunch how many calls players are getting corrected, how many challenges are being used likely just to get a breather and make a call on if the benefit of more correct outcomes is worth it or not in their eyes.
Foul play is fair enough. But it should be blatant foul play only.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
23,325
Reaction score
2,057
Location
IN A BAR
I’m a fan of if the balls out of play then stop the clock, into touch, drop outs, try’s scored etc etc.

Also my pet hate is penalties for crusher tackles, always comes down to a 50/50 calls and players staying down.
I can’t recall any serious intentional ones for a long time.
80 minutes of football is good in principle but makes managing length of game tricky from a broadcast perspective which is extremely relevant from a $ perspective.

Crusher tackles I would say there were maybe around 3 bad ones last season... lets ask the MRC
14 total charges.
Suspensions - Matterson 3 games
Repeat fines - Rudolf twice
So all in all from 14 deemed charge worthy there was really only one deemed especially bad. I agree most of the ones not charged appear to be attackers fault and should be play on.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
23,325
Reaction score
2,057
Location
IN A BAR
Foul play is fair enough. But it should be blatant foul play only.

If ref misses a high tackle but bunker spots it is it blatant or not?

Is deliberate (or perhaps, significant) a good word for what you are thinking?
In that case I think that is kind of in line with what I was saying - if it is worth a penalty or bin then tell ref, otherwise just note it for the MRC to look at. We don't need a stoppage so an accidental grade 1 high shot from halfway through the set before can be put on report.
 
Last edited:

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
9,747
Reaction score
1,338
Pausing the game even just for a moment to put a player on report for foul play identified by the bunker but then not awarding a penalty or any other benefit seems like a waste of time. Bunker should just be able to note things for MRC unless they deem it bad enough to penalise or bin retrospectively. They could keep using the bunker here without all the stoppages.
I reckon this one was originally for TV/fans, but it's now used as a differentiator for whether or not the bunker can intervene - so we are stuck with it.

They appease the punters by saying "I saw that you naughty boy" or "I missed that, but the bloke watching the TV saw it". Noting something in a match report is something necessary for referees who don't have every game recorded on video., but the whole "on report" thing is completely unnecessary as a tool for MRC when there are a dozen camera angles, slo-mo, etc. and a bunch of refs watch every game in detail on a Monday.
 
Top