[Wanderer]

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:27 am  

McClennan wrote:

I don't recall the ref having that big an influence on the winning team in most of the games that I've seen.

I'd have to say that the video ref had a big impact last night.

The Bradford v Leeds game should have finished a 6-6 draw as there is clearly foul play in the build up to the try. The referee had a suspicion of this as it was one of the things the VR was asked to look at but it was a poor decision by Mr Alibert to ignore this and allow the try to stand.

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:28 am  

WANDERER wrote:

I concur. Webb clearly makes no attempt to retire behind the play-the-ball and becomes involved in that play which he is not entitled to. Had Burrow been tackled the next play-the-ball would have enabled Webb to become involved assuming he was behind that play-the-ball.

is that in the rules anywhere?

[Wanderer]

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:31 am  

Are you saying that he wasn't offside? If he was he needs to remain inactive whilst attempting to get back onside.

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:33 am  

WANDERER wrote:

Are you saying that he wasn't offside? If he was he needs to remain inactive whilst attempting to get back onside.

no im saying your view of it whilst convenient isnt quite what the rules are

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:36 am  

My opinion is (and i expect to be shot down over this) the standard of refereeing is very high, they do an exceptionally difficult job very well, the amount of times I have been to a match and critised their decisions only to find out when watching it back on sky+ that they were actually spot on is countless, the one criticism i have is that they let too many forward passes go, but for these they need help from their linesmen, when your team underperforms somebody is to blame and that is usually the ref, they were several contentious issues regarding my team last night but i think between the ref and VR they called them correctly.

[Wanderer]

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:38 am  

Not convienient as I have no allegiance to either side.

Is this not true .... You are offside in Rugby League if you are within the gap maintained between the attacking and defensive sides by the referee or if you interfere with play after being in front of a team mate.

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:39 am  

Sadfish wrote:

We have

I believe the quote I was replying to was 'less effective' not 'ineffective'. Saints are very good a getting a roll on based on quick play the balls but they are also very good at other things.

SmokeyTA wrote:

why should we change the rules because some teams arent good enough to defend properly?

Why should we ever change the rules? To make the sport better. There is a view that scooting from dummy half is boring and one dimensional. Allowing a more controlled play the ball makes this tactic less effective and so encourages other tactics.

SmokeyTA wrote:

is that in the rules anywhere?

players of the side not in possession other than the player taking part in the play-the-ball and the acting half back are out of play if they fail to retire ten (10) metres from the point at which the ball is played or to their own goal lines. Players of the side in possession other than the player taking part in the play-the-ball and the acting halfback must retire behind their players involved in the play-the-ball or to their own goal line.
Having retired the distance prescribed in the preceding paragraph no player of the team not in possession may advance until the ball has cleared the ruck. A player who is out of play may again take part in the game when the advantage gained by not retiring has been lost.

[Wanderer]

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:40 am  

We concur.

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:41 am  

WANDERER wrote:

Not convienient as I have no allegiance to either side.

Is this not true .... You are offside in Rugby League if you are within the gap maintained between the attacking and defensive sides by the referee or if you interfere with play after being in front of a team mate.

no,

[Wanderer]

: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:41 am  

See SBR's post above.