SeaEagleRock8 said:
Technical Coach said:
For many years now you will notice teams especially in the first 10mins of each half slowing the play the ball for such an obvious extended time, not going back the ten or leaving too early--- wanting to give a penalty away.
Why you might ask well some coaches have the theory it is better to rack up early penalty counts against themselves while fresh so they get away with more in the back end of halves when fatigue creeps in.
Generating 4-5 penalties in the first 10-15mins usually means on average you will only receive a further 2-3 for the rest of the half and in some instances if you have a ref wanting to keep a low penalty count(for the whole game) you might only get 2-3 more for the rest of the game.
The last thing a team needs is back to back penalties against them when fatigue is kicking in at the back end of halves---the theory does not always work out but there is a growing feeling it offers more positives than negatives.
Too many square up patterns and rules that are not black and white allowing teams to dictate to refs not the other way around.
Problem is it will take 2yrs of pain and constant outcry over way too many penalties given away to turn the tide---the coaches and players are ruling the game to the point of killing it.
If this was true, surely the instructions would be to only give away penalties on tackle 1 or 2. Those are the plays that can stunt the oppositions whole set of 6 if you get away with it, and if you don't it still doesn't cost too many extra tackles in defence, and not too much distance from the touch-finder if the penalty is conceded close to the sideline.
Also a penalty for slowing the play the ball would be better than for off-side, because for off-side the penalty is 10m further downfield??
When you are trying to just generate a quick run up of penalties the best way to do it is to vary it a little.
Slowing the play the ball is the best option but a ref will want to be seen as clamping down on many areas at once and will start to be more lenient after a few penalties in the same area.
It's also about the bigger picture and how you want the game to be ruled.
(Not saying this happens but just to illustrate my point)
Souths for example might give away 4 penalties at the start for slow play the balls in the hope that the balancing penalties are for the same reason in the back end of halves to allow Isacc Luke to take advantage of their rolling forward pack.
On the flip side the ref is lenient on Souths slowing down the play the ball due to already pinning them several times in this area an advantage for bigger forward packs in the back end of halves, mind you Souths have done a Manly and really dominated tackles and deserve to be rewarded.
You might as a team want a team to be penalised more for inside the 10 in certain parts of the game to give more space to your backs when it is most advantageous.
In the early stages of a game giving up 10m is not a big deal and if the ref does not penalise for this reason more benefit to you it is worth the risk early on.
The refs are in a no win situation, too many rules can be interpreted differently(which will always happen but way too many at the moment) , others are not black and white, if they penalise like crazy there will be 100 penalties a game and if they don't penalise enough teams/coaches take advantage the rules have become a joke.
Play the balls are a joke merely making a "genuine" effort to use your foot is enough this list goes on and on.
The Who said:
Interesting theory TC.
But how come the Book-Cookers only gave away one penalty in the entire 80 minute grand final last year?
Oh, that's right. Shame Hayne was their 14th man.
I'm surprised I haven't read an outcry from the Book-Cooker fans that Shame Hayne wasn't selected to officiate their loss to the Vermin. Rusty must have outbid Politis for his services.
It is a GF, many big games are policed differently not all but an increased amount that is for sure.
I think the penalty count was 5-2 so well under the average of around 13 which is to be expected for a GF.
Mark from Brisbane said:
I have been saying for years that the refs are deciding matches, maybe I was wrong maybe it's cheating players manipulating the system.
I wonder if they introduced a system of binning a player say every 3 penalties would see this continue. I know seems a bit unfair , and doubt it would ever see the light of day but maybe 5 mins in the bin for every 3rd penalty??
Probably not the answer BUT how else do you control this???
It would be oh so "UnAustralian" to manipulate the refs or "Dive" or "Cheat"---we tend to judge other nations sporting cultures as cheats and not in the spirit of the game when really Professional Team Sport in Australia has really only hit off in the last 15-20 years.
Even doping was seen as "UnAustralian" there just was not enough financial incentive in the past to do so.
It is more the Ref's being played than the Refs "deliberately" deciding games, it is like a Poker game and the coaches/teams are winning the battle.
Rules have to be more Black and White unlike people like Gus wanting rules that have an element of "that is just rugby league let it go rule foundation". Both sides have their negatives but at the moment we keep going around in circles and nothing is improving.
If we continue on the same path The Ref Rules Boss will change every 2 years pretty much as is happening now which goes to show we are getting it all wrong.
Let's not mistake this post as crying poor Manly is not in the GF, we never had the team to do so this year.
