Re: Rule change needed : Tue Aug 07, 2012 10:37 pm  

The rule is fine, correct decision.

Re: Rule change needed : Tue Aug 07, 2012 11:02 pm  

Surely common sense comes into it.

There is no way that Makinson would have wanted a drop out in that situation with no real pressure on him...he slipped so clearly never went to 'ground it'. The rule is daft and from that moment Warrington had 3 consecutive sets of six.

jdrocket wrote:

If Makinson can't stay up and not ground the ball, unlike all the other players in the league, then he's a bit poop.

SELL HIM FOR SLIPPING! Can't be having players who slip now can we...

Re: Rule change needed : Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:15 am  

supercat wrote:

He slipped as far as i saw it. If so then not intentionally grounding it. As someone posted earlier they should clearly be seen to ground this ball.

....and when a player knocks on, he didn't intentionally do it so he should be given it back to have another go.

Was an error by Makinson, but one I can forgive him for. All players make mistakes but it doesn't warrant a rule change.

I thought Meli had the ball securely in his hands and Monaghan took it from him, albeit it almost immediatley. Other than it being perhaps deemed as tackling the defender in the air, it looked like a one on one ball steal. I didn't know the rule was that as soon as the defender has the ball, it's 'diffused the bomb' (surely that's not the wording in the rule book!) even though his feet were still off the ground

[Uncle Rico]

Re: Rule change needed : Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:16 am  

saintcj wrote:

The rule is fine, correct decision.

Well said CJ

For all those Saints that want a rule change consider that Atkins didn't mean to throw the ball forward to Riley and indeed there was no advantage in him doing so, he didn't mean to do it, it was just a mistake.

We should all accept that mistakes happen and get over it. In fact, unpredictability is one of the key ingredients of sport at any level.

Re: Rule change needed : Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:41 am  

Saddened! wrote:

Yeah, no one is saying it was the wrong decision, we're saying they should change the rules so the players can do what Makinson did and carry on. For example, by raising their arm or staying on the ground to claim it as grounded. Anywhere else on the pitch it would be okay under the rules, why should the fact he's over the try line be any different?

Its different in the try area to stop constant infringements. For instance, if he was allowed to get up and play on (as in the field of play), there would be countless kicks in to in goal followed by the Gavin Clinchs of this world who will attempt to steal the ball from the defender. Cue countless video refs decisions debating whether the defender was trying to ground it as the attacker steals it....or.... the attacker does steal it but then the defender grounds it with the attacker for a simultaneous grounding which would have to have a rule made to state who would be given preference in these circumstances.

I think it would also result in injuries as defenders try to raise their arms, nod their heads or text the video ref while a couple forwards try to stop them, or ground the ball themselves, or effect a knock on, blah blah blah.

I know some are going to mention Aussie Rules where when the ball is caught on the full, its a 'mark'. How do you know when its a mark....well when he catches it. The player can then run on and continue with open play or they can stop and look for a kick or pass. I'm not sure how this would work. For instance id Makinson were allowed to get up and play on, but then knocks on or has the ball stoled and a try is scored, would there not be claims that he had grounded the ball and was returning to 20m tap. Some other form of restart would then need to be created and if its from anywhere less than the 20m line, we'll just end up with a precision kicking game in to the in goal area to maintain pressure and territory.

Re: Rule change needed : Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:59 am  

Maybe we should only penalise knock-ons when they're deliberate, or a foot in touch. I'm sure Riley didn't mean to put his toe in the line when he went in at the corner, surely common sense should apply and reward his good play.

Re: Rule change needed : Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:13 am  

this is a rediculous thread

Re: Rule change needed : Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:15 am  

wertyuio wrote:

Its different in the try area to stop constant infringements. For instance, if he was allowed to get up and play on (as in the field of play), there would be countless kicks in to in goal followed by the Gavin Clinchs of this world who will attempt to steal the ball from the defender. Cue countless video refs decisions debating whether the defender was trying to ground it as the attacker steals it....or.... the attacker does steal it but then the defender grounds it with the attacker for a simultaneous grounding which would have to have a rule made to state who would be given preference in these circumstances.

I think it would also result in injuries as defenders try to raise their arms, nod their heads or text the video ref while a couple forwards try to stop them, or ground the ball themselves, or effect a knock on, blah blah blah.

I know some are going to mention Aussie Rules where when the ball is caught on the full, its a 'mark'. How do you know when its a mark....well when he catches it. The player can then run on and continue with open play or they can stop and look for a kick or pass. I'm not sure how this would work. For instance id Makinson were allowed to get up and play on, but then knocks on or has the ball stoled and a try is scored, would there not be claims that he had grounded the ball and was returning to 20m tap. Some other form of restart would then need to be created and if its from anywhere less than the 20m line, we'll just end up with a precision kicking game in to the in goal area to maintain pressure and territory.

They should just make it so you can't ground the ball in your own goal area, you have to be tackled, leave the field or leave the in goal. It's clearly not a major issue, but something that would enable players to continue playing. We've seen it a few times this season where players have been called back because they've rolled on the floor when collecting kicks and been forced to do a drop out despite them not being under any pressure at all.

The other change I suggested is a more important one. Hoofing it dead when you are under pressure takes very little skill and rewards negative play. It should be a tap from where it's kicked IMO. Plenty of teams use it to maintain pressure despite their pack not being on top.

Re: Rule change needed : Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:55 am  

Uncle Rico wrote:

For all those Saints that want a rule change consider that Atkins didn't mean to throw the ball forward to Riley and indeed there was no advantage in him doing so, he didn't mean to do it, it was just a mistake

How are they comparable?

Re: Rule change needed : Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:57 am  

I don't think the rule needs changing per se, just a bit of common sense applied. There was no pressure on him and he clearly didn't deliberately ground the ball, so he should just be able to get up and play on...

Saddened! wrote:

Yup, daft rule. To ground the ball you should have to remain on the floor or make a signal, like a raised arm?

Another one that has needed changing for years is the restart from the 20 when a side hoofs the ball over the goal line. It should be a tap from wherever it was kicked.

Agree with this 100%! I noticed Wire doing that to slow the game down, my mate was telling me Bradford did it to Widnes on Sunday as well, in what was a close game and probably would have made a difference! Also remember Wigan trying it against us in a play-off a few years ago. It's poor play and shouldn't be rewarded. Nothing clever about it, despite what Stevo tells you!