NRL are committing suicide

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
  • We have been getting regular requests for users who have been locked out of their accounts because they have changed email adresses over the lifetime of their accounts. Please make sure the email address under your account is your current and correct email address in order to avoid this in the future. You can set your email address at https://silvertails.net/account/account-details
  • Wwe are currently experience some server issues which I am working through and hoping to resolve soon, Please bare with me whilst I work through making some changes and possible intermittent outages.
  • Apologies all our server was runing rogue. I managed to get us back to a point from 2:45 today though there is an attachment issue i will fix shortly. Things should be smooth now though
This new so called crack down is going to encourage more milking, already started
As soon as they feel a slap on the head players are rolling around grasping their heads while the team mates throw their arms uo
Won't be long before we start seeing soccer like dives.
There was no replay after replay of the hit on Papenhausen ... I reckon the damage was done when he hit the ground, still a late tackle and warranted a sin bin but if you watch it he appears to miss his head but the force off their bodies coming together bounces Papenhausen to the ground I don't think he smashed him in the head as was claimed
 
What a load of BS you speak, 100 years completely eradicated, surely you're joking, they got rid of throwing punches now head highs, most agree the send offs were warranted, some of the sin bins were iffy, but so are alot of other decisions it's called human error
I'm just having a bit of fun pretending that you are V'landys in disguise. I'm not seriously directing any anger towards you. I understand that we need to crack down on high tackles. My biggest concern for the game is the way they've sped it up to the point where teams are regularly down by 20-30 points at halftime; that's schoolboy football and not an engaging contest. Yes, we needed to speed the game up but not to the extent that they have.

Also, having the Bunker basically referee the game through an earpiece is absurd. Sometimes the referee is playing out a whole set before calling the play back 80m downfield for a penalty?! That is awful for fans watching the game. There is no point getting excited when watching a match because a '1000 tick' process is happening in a bunker somewhere that will eventually decide the outcome...we can't trust our eyes anymore because the game is not what we see, it's what the guys with million camera angles are scheming at.
 
Lol - classic. He really did sat that Maxta. I ain't telling a fib. He is in the top five most annoying league personalities in my opinion. Right at the very pinnacle of the dartboard favourites.
Funny thing is, though I missed the Robinson interview, I did see Bennetts which was more along the lines of my feelings....in fairness I probably mixed my explanation up a bit last night after a Massive weekend.
First and foremost, any direct contact to the head needs to be outlawed and this is increasing in 2021 due to the speed of the game...tired players get lazy and often as the roll on is so quick through the middle, the contacts are far more frequent than older days where you could dominate and slow the tackled player and reset defensively...now the attack is rolling forward at 100mph as the defence retreat's and the defenders are not able to get their feet positioned before making contact, leading to awkward positioning and often bad technique including high shots.
  • This falling player being called high, should be common sense as it is a contact sport and very tough for a 6'3 bloke to not make a high tackle on a bloke 1 - 2 foot off the ground...common sense needs to prevail here.
  • When a ref misses something in a tackle then 4 tackles later after a kick down field....it comes back for a penalty....if it's missed in flight, save it for the judiciary and maybe a warning on the run to the bloke who was involved....don't "Rewind" the game.
  • These players faking and waiting for a penalty is a soccer scam and they should get an auto 10 minutes off to recover....they maybe legitimate which would also constitute 10 , but for those acting, will stop them getting up smiling and winking at team mates and instead have to leave the field for 10m....for those who are genuinely injured, there's no difference as they need to get looked over anyways.
  • Have made numerous threads on the fact the game needs rewards for textbook legs tackles, with more time for the defender to dominate with extra time to getoff instead of players like Jake getting screamed at the they hit the ground....Ennis was on this last night also and I have a feeling there will become a stronger push for this soon.
 
I'm just having a bit of fun pretending that you are V'landys in disguise. I'm not seriously directing any anger towards you. I understand that we need to crack down on high tackles. My biggest concern for the game is the way they've sped it up to the point where teams are regularly down by 20-30 points at halftime; that's schoolboy football and not an engaging contest. Yes, we needed to speed the game up but not to the extent that they have.

Also, having the Bunker basically referee the game through an earpiece is absurd. Sometimes the referee is playing out a whole set before calling the play back 80m downfield for a penalty?! That is awful for fans watching the game. There is no point getting excited when watching a match because a '1000 tick' process is happening in a bunker somewhere that will eventually decide the outcome...we can't trust our eyes anymore because the game is not what we see, it's what the guys with million camera angles are scheming at.
HaHaHa, I was slow on that post, I did wonder how you new my name, obviously a coincidence.
I do agree with you about the play being called back 80m for a penalty, when it happened in our game I was thinking, if we drop the ball early in the tackle count we're under pressure instead of having them pegged in their 20/30m.
Not sure I like the refs awarding tries either, the supporters get excited, only for the bunker to take it away, at least before when the ref awarded the try that was usually the end of it.
Unfortunately, as you say 1000 camera angles no one wants to be proved wrong.
Indiscretions will always be part of sport, no matter how good or how many cameras there are, look at the VAR in soccer and the poor decisions, because a human is watching the replays.
 
Funny thing is, though I missed the Robinson interview, I did see Bennetts which was more along the lines of my feelings....in fairness I probably mixed my explanation up a bit last night after a Massive weekend.
First and foremost, any direct contact to the head needs to be outlawed and this is increasing in 2021 due to the speed of the game...tired players get lazy and often as the roll on is so quick through the middle, the contacts are far more frequent than older days where you could dominate and slow the tackled player and reset defensively...now the attack is rolling forward at 100mph as the defence retreat's and the defenders are not able to get their feet positioned before making contact, leading to awkward positioning and often bad technique including high shots.
  • This falling player being called high, should be common sense as it is a contact sport and very tough for a 6'3 bloke to not make a high tackle on a bloke 1 - 2 foot off the ground...common sense needs to prevail here.
  • When a ref misses something in a tackle then 4 tackles later after a kick down field....it comes back for a penalty....if it's missed in flight, save it for the judiciary and maybe a warning on the run to the bloke who was involved....don't "Rewind" the game.
  • These players faking and waiting for a penalty is a soccer scam and they should get an auto 10 minutes off to recover....they maybe legitimate which would also constitute 10 , but for those acting, will stop them getting up smiling and winking at team mates and instead have to leave the field for 10m....for those who are genuinely injured, there's no difference as they need to get looked over anyways.
  • Have made numerous threads on the fact the game needs rewards for textbook legs tackles, with more time for the defender to dominate with extra time to getoff instead of players like Jake getting screamed at the they hit the ground....Ennis was on this last night also and I have a feeling there will become a stronger push for this soon.
Yeah I'm so sick of seeing blokes holding the back of their neck feigning injury so the ref will stop play & wait for the bunker to rule on a crusher tackle then up on their feet involved in the next play after the penalty all fine again.

If the ref doesn't pick it up there & then, play on & let the match review committee punish it if it's bad enough later in the week.
 
Last edited:
Funny thing is, though I missed the Robinson interview, I did see Bennetts which was more along the lines of my feelings....in fairness I probably mixed my explanation up a bit last night after a Massive weekend.
First and foremost, any direct contact to the head needs to be outlawed and this is increasing in 2021 due to the speed of the game...tired players get lazy and often as the roll on is so quick through the middle, the contacts are far more frequent than older days where you could dominate and slow the tackled player and reset defensively...now the attack is rolling forward at 100mph as the defence retreat's and the defenders are not able to get their feet positioned before making contact, leading to awkward positioning and often bad technique including high shots.

  • .
  • This falling player being called high, should be common sense as it is a contact sport and very tough for a 6'3 bloke to not make a high tackle on a bloke 1 - 2 foot off the ground...common sense needs to prevail here.
  • When a ref misses something in a tackle then 4 tackles later after a kick down field....it comes back for a penalty....if it's missed in flight, save it for the judiciary and maybe a warning on the run to the bloke who was involved....don't "Rewind" the game.
  • These players faking and waiting for a penalty is a soccer scam and they should get an auto 10 minutes off to recover....they maybe legitimate which would also constitute 10 , but for those acting, will stop them getting up smiling and winking at team mates and instead have to leave the field for 10m....for those who are genuinely injured, there's no difference as they need to get looked over anyways.
  • Have made numerous threads on the fact the game needs rewards for textbook legs tackles, with more time for the defender to dominate with extra time to getoff instead of players like Jake getting screamed at the they hit the ground....Ennis was on this last night also and I have a feeling there will become a stronger push for this soon.

Problem with the legs tackle though is that I believe it will cause even worse concussions. How many players do we see get knocked out from putting their head in the wrong place. And when they get it wrong - it's generally pretty bad - like knocked out cold bad.

I agree with everything else.
 
If they are going to continue with this, then they need to work out EXACTLY what warrants a bining and be CONSISTENT. Accidental contact needs a penalty and on report... a 5 min sin bin at the most, 10 min does irreparable damage in a lot of games.
It's hard when making policy on the run, although given how often the NRL does this they should be pretty good by now. But they have attempted to set out objective criteria:

1. Direct or forceful contact to the head or neck in a tackle will result in a penalty and at least sin bin, while for the worst offences a send off will occur. I think the send-offs were all warranted. I find it bizarre to think that these tackles weren't getting sent off before.

2. Indirect forceful contact, that means if a swinging arm bounces off the chest and ends up hitting the head and the player falls in the tackle, then that will be at least a penalty and sin bin. I didn't watch all games but it seemed that there was a consistency in this.

3. If the contact is minimal, then that will be a penalty, but the player will still be put on report.
There was always going to be an over-correction but at least they are finally taking the issue seriously. Bennett was right when he said that the other codes are light years ahead of the NRL on player welfare and the Commission would be sh!tting bricks about the prospect of future class actions.

I agree with you that 'accidental contact' needs to be taken into account. I.e., mitigating circumstances need to be taken into account in determining whether the sin bin is used (not whether there is a penalty). The bloke that got sin-binned for the hit on Teddy seemed hard done by to me - his chest hit Teddy, who was falling.

I also agree with you on there needing to be a rethink on ensuring the effect of the bin is proportionate to the crime. I have no problem with 10 mins for dangerous contact, but would prefer 'professional foul' sin bins to be limited to 10 minutes or whenever the other team scores, whichever comes first.

Sorry to all as this is a bit of a ramble. I am back at Uni for intensive classes these past few days and am wired from the long days and nights doing assignments!
 
Everybody wanted the wrestle gone ... until they started penalising ... and then everybody started screaming there are too many penalties ..

Now it's head shots ....

It's a pretty simple notion ... don't swing your arms at neck height, and don't shoulder charge the head ... the dopes that got pinged on the weekend deserved what they got ...

My only gripe is they need to add a new classification called unavoidable .... unintentional is okay but RL is a collision sport and the unexpected does happen ... a player tripping and falling into an arm swung at waist level should not be penalised ..

The success or failure will be revealed over the next 2 weeks ... good footballers with good technique have nothing to worry about ..
 
The problem with the NRL is that they don't have any thinkers. They don't appear to understand due diligence and transition. IMO they are conducting themselves like amateurs and in the face of criticism they simply dig in against those they dare criticize their decisions.

Frankly the structure of the administration of the game is seriously flawed. Nothing is working well.

I have always believed the NRL has allowed to many ex footballers to be involved in important decision making roles. Similarly football clubs have had the same problem but ex players are popular with members and so they get themselves elected onto the boards.

Rugby League is part of our social fabric that needs to be protected and managed with respect and not chopped and diced at the whim of a few without due diligence and consultation.

The game has changed progressively over time with coaches seeking to get the edge by exploiting inadequacies in the rules. In the response we have either seen acquiescence or ineffective changes from the NRL. The tackling style has changed significantly because of the NRL not taking appropriate action to eradicate the wrestle and the rolling of players onto their backs. Repeat sets have not fixed these problems just created additional problems the game didn't need.

There needs to be a independent study, based upon historical research of the game with input from coaches, players and former players and then a detailed independent report released with professional recommendations. Then a plan needs to be developed to carefully implement and transition the recommendations. Not radical changes being made mid season.

A major issue is that the NRL love to blame everybody else, namely the clubs, the coaches and the players. It's time they had a good look at themselves and then completely rebuilt the judiciary from the ground up and start with not having ex footballers in positions where they decide charges and sit on the judiciary. When criticized the NRL get on the front foot and appear to resent any kind of criticism. Don't dare criticize the governance.
 
unintentional is okay but RL is a collision sport and the unexpected does happen ... a player tripping and falling into an arm swung at waist level should not be penalised ..
That one is a grey area but ultimately the duty of care is upon the tackler. Ditto the argument 'it's hard for a 194cm player to avoid hitting a 182cm player high'. Players are always going to be tripping and falling as that is part of the game.
If the contact is forceful then bin or send off, and if reported and charged then the circumstances can be raised in mitigation of the penalty.
 
That one is a grey area but ultimately the duty of care is upon the tackler. Ditto the argument 'it's hard for a 194cm player to avoid hitting a 182cm player high'. Players are always going to be tripping and falling as that is part of the game.
If the contact is forceful then bin or send off, and if reported and charged then the circumstances can be raised in mitigation of the penalty.

I doubt that you would get a conviction for a breach of duty of care under the circumstances I outlined ... perhaps we need to add an "Act of God" clause that covers all many of unavoidable matters ..
 
The main problem, and the reason for the outcry, is the sudden crackdown on rules that were already in existence. If as @bob dylan suggested earlier the crackdown is here to stay then the complaints will probably dissipate quite soon.
I guess we've been bitten so many times before by NRL crackdowns that were soon wound back or forgotten.
Players will still get knocked out by their own teammates in head clashes or hitting the ground after flying for a bomb or getting their head in an awkward spot when making a tackle, no way to rub out that danger, so the 'making the game soft' argument is a furphy.
When Hetherington whacked Marty last year he absoluteley should have been sent off.
 
I doubt that you would get a conviction for a breach of duty of care under the circumstances I outlined ... perhaps we need to add an "Act of God" clause that covers all many of unavoidable matters ..
Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Brett Stewart was slipping low when Crocker got him in 2007, I'm still adamant he should have been sent for that one.
 
Think that the intent to reduce or significantly minimize head shots is warranted but definitely not so arbitrary and inflexible taking into account some of the rulings were on the weekend , and a common sense factor to apply also . Didn 't see all of the infringements and send off 's but if the Manly - broncs game was an example , think that both Bronc"s players should have stayed on the field but definitely on report [ although in Gamble's ? case, that of course was his second offence and very intentionally jumped to make that 2 nd high shot on Garrick ] so a sin bin wasn "t really out of the question in that regard ] Papalii should have been sent , excellent player but that careless shot could have done real damage and Hodgson "s chicken wing , appalling really . If a player complains of a crusher , really should not be an automatic penalty and the bunker to sensibly use its discretion . Did not see all of the other infringements Guess that it was a combination of a " show case ' weekend of footy and some justified concern with a perception or otherwise of excessive high shots occurring that instigated the crackdown . On the right track trying to stamp out the avoidable high shots but seems necessary for a more common sense and less stringent application in approaching weeks .
 
Evolution has seen the players get bigger but not necessarily smarter, and the increase in speed is creating several off-shoot problems. Natural selection will hopefully kick in soon, which will see the bigger players shrink in size.
 

Dinosaurs face extinction if players, coaches don't adapt to tightening of rules

Adapt or face extinction is the blunt message as coaches and players now risk losing games and the chance to challenge for premierships if their teams don’t fall into line with the ARL Commission’s mandate to eradicate head contact.

The goalposts for rugby league have not shifted.

The laws have always been in place to penalise players for head contact, but the reality is discretion is no longer an acceptable approach to a problem that sports all over the world are confronting.

Rugby league is not the only code trying to strike the balance between protecting their core asset - the players - and the fabric of their sport.

Like any change, there is going to be a period of familiarisation and misunderstanding. In rugby league, there will even be the odd brain explosion.

Nothing is ever perfect and in a sport like rugby league it will be near impossible to completely remove head contact from the game but it’s clear now that discipline is more important than ever.

The teams who don’t commit to tackling lower to reduce the risk of accidentally hitting the head will eventually slip up and find themselves down on personnel in games and it could cost them a crucial result.

"This is a moment in time. Any time that you introduce change, there are always people that are resistant to it. It’s human nature," NRL chief executive Andrew Abdo told The Sunday Footy Show.

"Anyone who thinks the game is losing the core of its fabric hasn't been to a game live, hasn't experienced Magic Round.

"This is an intense, physical game, and we are talking about taking the responsible leadership position of eliminating the damage that can be done from dangerous head-high shots.

"I make no apologies for that and I absolutely believe that the decision the Commission have made and the way we are implementing this is right.

"But I'll also say, what do we know about our coaches and our teams? They're professional, they evolve, there's a learning curve, and they'll adapt. The teams that adapt quicker than others will have a competitive advantage."

It was a dramatic but also entertaining Magic Round as 130,059 fans packed Suncorp Stadium across the three days.

Anyone who says the crackdown ruined the spectacle of the event is obviously tough to please as there was stunning football and moments of brilliance all weekend regardless of the law enforcement.

Just like the end of the biff and shoulder charge, the magical talents of the likes of Cleary, Tedesco, Addo-Carr and Tom Trbojevic will still keep turnstiles ticking and fans wanting to see more.


Of the eight games across Magic Round at Suncorp Stadium, the Eels v Warriors clash was the only match not to involve any players sent to the sin bin or sent off.

In all, 14 players were sent to the sin bin while Canberra’s Josh Papalii and St George Illawarra’s Tyrell Fuimaono were banished for dangerous high tackles that knocked out their victims.

Titans forward Herman Ese’ese then produced arguably the dumbest tackle of the season – rushing up to put a hit on Panthers winger Brian To’o with a swinging arm that left referee no other option but to remove him from the field.

His tackle was a send-off in any era, not just in the middle of the NRL’s clean-act offensive.

It was the first time in the NRL era, and first time in 25 years, that there had been three send-offs in a round.

A decade ago the NRL had two send-offs in the same round during the infamous Battle of Brookvale when Manly’s Glenn Stewart and Melbourne’s Adam Blair were marched for reigniting their punch up whilst on their way to the sin bin.

But while fans and some former players were quick to criticise the excessive use of the sin bin and enormous number of incidents placed on report, it is hard to argue that almost all of the issues were appropriately dealt with as players refused to heed the lessons or advice prior to the round.

The fact Josh McGuire was sin-binned for a swinging arm just eight minutes into St George Illawarra’s loss to Melbourne is proof some players are going to be slower to comprehend the game’s priorities and how they must change their behaviour.


Players who act like Ese'ese will soon become extinct in rugby league as coaches realise you cannot carry risky liabilities and must value discipline over aggression.

"We were the last game, we had all the time in the world to get our own house in order," Titans coach Justin Holbrook said.

"It’s a completely reckless decision and we paid the price for it."


Rabbitohs veteran Wayne Bennett and Roosters counterpart Trent Robinson were the voices of reason among the coaching fraternity in backing the NRL’s strong stance while Warriors coach Nathan Brown felt his game – which had the fewest incidents of the weekend – was an indication of middle ground being reached by both players and referees.

"Whether everyone found some sort of middle ground I’m not too sure but we just came into the game expecting there was a possibility we could find someone in the bin you know because every other game had plenty of people in the bin," Brown said.

"No coaches want people to hit people in the head that is for sure but sometimes it happens.

"The game has taken that approach and we just have to adjust and go with it."
 
sin-bins_20210517-1.jpg
 
HaHaHa, I was slow on that post, I did wonder how you new my name, obviously a coincidence.
I do agree with you about the play being called back 80m for a penalty, when it happened in our game I was thinking, if we drop the ball early in the tackle count we're under pressure instead of having them pegged in their 20/30m.
Not sure I like the refs awarding tries either, the supporters get excited, only for the bunker to take it away, at least before when the ref awarded the try that was usually the end of it.
Unfortunately, as you say 1000 camera angles no one wants to be proved wrong.
Indiscretions will always be part of sport, no matter how good or how many cameras there are, look at the VAR in soccer and the poor decisions, because a human is watching the replays.
wow, crazy coincidence! I am so sorry that it looked like I was directing my rage at you. Oops...

I totally agree concerning human error, which is why I think I can live with the referees decisions because we still get mistakes with the bunker. At least with the referee, we didn't have to wait 2 minutes to eventually get to that error (if that makes sense). There are merits to the bunker but i'd leave them out of the officiating of the game altogether and just have them decide on put downs/groundings only. The touchies can rule offside and come in to report foul play that the referee has missed. The refs can spot obstructions, etc. All things that humans used to be able to do until we stopped asking them to do it and placed the onus on video footage instead.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
9 8 1 116 18
9 7 2 72 16
9 7 2 49 16
11 7 4 59 14
9 6 3 57 14
10 6 4 -10 14
10 6 4 115 12
10 5 5 -56 12
11 5 5 30 11
10 4 6 15 10
10 5 5 -13 10
10 4 6 -18 8
9 3 6 -71 8
10 3 6 -9 7
9 2 7 -69 6
9 2 7 -87 6
9 1 8 -180 4
Back
Top Bottom