News NRL to crackdown on foul play, time-wasting

Muppet

Moderator
Staff member
Apr 7, 2013
1,166
212
63
54
NRL players are more likely to be sent from the field for a shoulder charge after the NRL Competition Committee moved to launch a crackdown on foul play, and time wasting, on Thursday.
Only the worst examples of the outlawed shoulder charge would fall into the cross hairs of the new edict from the body which examines the rules of the NRL competition. But referees have been told to be more aware of the option of sending players from the field for shoulder charges or lifting tackles.
The move comes after the shoulder charge was banned ahead of the 2013 season and after South Sydney's Greg Inglis has been the repeated victim of lifting tackles this season.
Manly prop Richie Fa'aoso was given an eight-match suspension for twice dumping Inglis on his head last round, while Canterbury centre Krisnan Inu was suspended earlier this year for five matches for a lifting tackle on Inglis.
Referees boss Daniel Anderson said while Fa'aoso's tackles did not constitute a send off offence Inu's did and the new ruling from the Competition Committee means that such an offence would result in a player being dismissed from the field.
So too would shoulder charges gone wrong such as then-Brisbane back-rower Ben Te'o's hit on Wests Tigers prop Matt Groat last year.
"It's a decision that Daniel Anderson and his team need to have a greater awareness of using the option of sending players from the field for those types of tackles," NRL football operations manager Nathan McGuirk told AAP.
"There are tackles this year that have resulted in huge suspensions and the referees should be aware that sending players off is an option.
"The view of the committee is that we need greater awareness for the use of send-offs, particularly with one-on-one lifting tackles which result in a player landing directly on their head and shoulder charges that make forceful contact with the head or neck."
However, the sin-bin will not be used for repeated incidents of serious foul play as in the case of Fa'aoso who was twice placed on report against Souths.
The NRL has also asked Anderson to look at a way of dealing with the increasing prevalence of time wasting.
"The average time taken to set scrums has increased dramatically and that is something we have to be mindful of," McGuirk said.
"We have asked Daniel Anderson to go away and come back with some ideas as to how to deal with that this season."
McGuirk said one option was a time out for scrums similar to the one instituted for drop outs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TerryG

morkel

Graphics Guru
Apr 4, 2013
146
30
28
40
Various South East Queensland
The time wasting for scums is an easy one. Give it a time limit. Say, 20 seconds. If either team is not bound properly, penalty against them. If one team sets the quick scrum (that would normally force time to be blown off), the opposition has 10 seconds to form, otherwise penalty again. And once they're in position, that's it. Your fullback stays at prop and your prop gets in to the defensive line. Instead of bitching that scrums are useless in League, make it part of the spectacle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fanrrior and TerryG

Muppet

Moderator
Staff member
Apr 7, 2013
1,166
212
63
54
Time wasting is one of my pet hates in the NRL. I'm glad they are looking into it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fanrrior

TerryG

Voider of Warranties
Staff member
Apr 3, 2013
5,722
133
63
thenzwarriorsonline.com
Two rarely used hand signals.

10 in the sin-bin: Matt Ballin (R) of the Sea Eagles is sent to the sin bin for fighting by referee Ben Cummins as Sea Eagles captain Matt Orford (C) looks on during the 2009 round one NRL match. (Matt King/Getty Images)


10 in the sin-bin: Michael Jennings in Origin I 2012


Harrigan: “Off”
Gordon Tallis: “Who me?”


Some players don't get the message and you see both hand signals in the same game on the same players.

Adam Blair and Glenn Stewart both get 10 for fighting...


and then get Sent off for continuing to fight.




Although the ref should offered a discount based on how few punches actually landed.

We'll have to see how far the refs fall into line with Daniel Anderson's view.
 

Northern_Union

Forum fool
Jul 15, 2012
2,982
234
63
46
Timaru
www.theNZwarriorsonline.com
Bit harsh to send players off for a shoulder charge when it has been a vital part of our game for 128 years, and for todays generation they have grown up using the shoulder charge. I think it just proves how removed these administrators are from the game and people watching and playing it.
 

nodd

Well Known Member
Apr 4, 2013
634
122
43
53
hiding from the kids
The time wasting for scums is an easy one. Give it a time limit. Say, 20 seconds. If either team is not bound properly, penalty against them. If one team sets the quick scrum (that would normally force time to be blown off), the opposition has 10 seconds to form, otherwise penalty again. And once they're in position, that's it. Your fullback stays at prop and your prop gets in to the defensive line. Instead of bitching that scrums are useless in League, make it part of the spectacle.
Agree.
 

BuckinBronco

The Original BuckinBronco
Apr 6, 2013
67
5
8
Bit harsh to send players off for a shoulder charge when it has been a vital part of our game for 128 years, and for todays generation they have grown up using the shoulder charge. I think it just proves how removed these administrators are from the game and people watching and playing it.
They haven't grown up on the shoulder charge in Australia, maybe in NZ. Been banned for a long time over here.
 

The Red V

Member
Apr 24, 2013
16
1
3
They have to look into how the team that gets offended against gets the advantage. How they do this i'm not sure but if a player injuries a player in an act of foul play and that player cannot continue that team is disadvantaged. Then to make it worse he gets suspended so the team they play next gets the advantage. Does that seem fair?
 
Apr 23, 2013
13
1
1
35
Fortitude Valley
They have to look into how the team that gets offended against gets the advantage. How they do this i'm not sure but if a player injuries a player in an act of foul play and that player cannot continue that team is disadvantaged. Then to make it worse he gets suspended so the team they play next gets the advantage. Does that seem fair?
I see your point but its the way the cookie crumbles. I can't see how they could do it any other way to make it fair that wouldn't cop criticism from all angles.
 

morkel

Graphics Guru
Apr 4, 2013
146
30
28
40
Various South East Queensland
They have to look into how the team that gets offended against gets the advantage. How they do this i'm not sure but if a player injuries a player in an act of foul play and that player cannot continue that team is disadvantaged. Then to make it worse he gets suspended so the team they play next gets the advantage. Does that seem fair?
Haha, let's go for a sideline judiciary. Every game has 3 officials sitting there just in case foul play goes on. That of course means that the official legal representatives for each club must be there, and each player has to bring a suit to the game, but it's a necessary evil ;)
 

WhiteLineFever

Administrator
Staff member
Apr 19, 2013
88
10
8
They have to look into how the team that gets offended against gets the advantage. How they do this i'm not sure but if a player injuries a player in an act of foul play and that player cannot continue that team is disadvantaged. Then to make it worse he gets suspended so the team they play next gets the advantage. Does that seem fair?
Like Death and taxes it is a fact of life and something that cannot and will not be change.
 

morkel

Graphics Guru
Apr 4, 2013
146
30
28
40
Various South East Queensland
See, they must listen to us!!!

http://www.nrl.com/nrl-issues-time-wasting-crackdown/tabid/10874/newsid/72402/default.aspx

The NRL has issued a crackdown on time-wasting in a bid to regain an estimated eight minutes of match time every game.
Rules being introduced this week will require teams to be ready to pack for a scrum within 30 seconds of one being awarded, and the 40-second time limit for line drop-outs has also been cut to 30 seconds.
Failure to do so will result in a penalty, but only from round 15 onwards once the rule changes are properly enforced.
"Due to the fact these changes are to be introduced a third of the way through a season, we believe that a period of adjustment for players and officials to this amendment is required," general manager of football operations, Nathan McGuirk, said in a statement.
"Which is why penalties will not be enforced until the start of round 15."
In release on Tuesday, the NRL stated that up to eight minutes of time was being wasted every game because of tardiness at scrums.
"The introduction of a maximum time limit for the forming of scrums follows recommendations from the NRL Competition Committee, with statistics showing that an average of eight minutes per match was being lost packing scrums," the statement read.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TerryG

kit2010

Member
May 7, 2013
6
2
3
60
Excellent. There's another penalty Hayne can give away. His line drop outs take forever.

Two things I've noticed teams are really pushing their luck with this year is forward passes from dummy half and jumping the gun in defence - that is, instead of waiting until the ball is played they're taking off as soon as the man playing the ball puts the ball on the ground. Some teams more than others. With 2 refs neither of these should be going unpunished anywhere near as much as they do
 
  • Like
Reactions: TerryG and Muppet

Muppet

Moderator
Staff member
Apr 7, 2013
1,166
212
63
54
Excellent. There's another penalty Hayne can give away. His line drop outs take forever.

Two things I've noticed teams are really pushing their luck with this year is forward passes from dummy half and jumping the gun in defence - that is, instead of waiting until the ball is played they're taking off as soon as the man playing the ball puts the ball on the ground. Some teams more than others. With 2 refs neither of these should be going unpunished anywhere near as much as they do
Agree on both counts.
 

morkel

Graphics Guru
Apr 4, 2013
146
30
28
40
Various South East Queensland
Agree on both counts.
Me too. Though I was watching one game the other day and the 10 metres was dead-set 15. The forwards looked like they were doing a beep test. Thankfully both sides got the same treatment, but it just shows how something that should be pretty cut-and-dry on the refs part (a consistent 10 metres) can so easily be ignored. And what a massive difference just 1 metre makes to the up & back (1 extra metre = 2 metres of travel) and the advantage/disadvantage it gives.