Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Obstruction rule

nodd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2004
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
103
Referees to Use More Judgement
Tuesday, May 1, 2007 - 2:33 PM

A phone hook up between NRL refereeing officials and Telstra Premiership club coaches has recommended that referees continue to strongly police the issue of ‘decoy runners’ but that there should be changes to the ‘interpretations’ used to adjudicate ‘obstructions’ in the Telstra Premiership.



The conference call was unanimous in the view that ‘obstruction’ remained a challenging area for the game and one that would inevitably leave referees having to make subjective calls in determining whether defending teams are unfairly disadvantaged by the use of decoy runners.



It was accepted that the referees needed to remain strong in monitoring the use of decoy runners, rather than risk opening a flood gate that would allow ‘blocking plays’ to become a feature of the game.



Concerns around this area in the game last year led to a change in the interpretation of the rule which included situations in which players did not necessarily have to have made contact with the defensive line.



Referees will now place greater emphasis on whether they believe a defender has been impeded or not.



The coaches have in turn agreed that they need to accept the referee needs to be respected for having to make judgment calls in this area.



“There was genuine attempt from all parties last year to be more prescriptive and to provide clearer guidelines about the mechanics of what could and could not lead to an obstruction call,” Referees Coach Robert Finch said today.



“What we’ve agreed is that you can’t try and be too prescriptive and that coaches, players and fans have to accept that some things need to come down to the judgment of the referee or the video referee.



“There may still be some debate in this area, but for referees the deciding factor will be whether they believe a player who was in a position to make a tackle was impeded.”



The following amendments will be made to the 2007 Key Indicators:





KEY INDICATOR DEFINITION CHANGES 2007 – OBSTRUCTION



Point 1



Current interpretation:



“The ball carrier cannot run behind a decoy runner and gain an advantage regardless of any contact between the decoy and the defence”



This interpretation has been eliminated and the current interpretation as per the Laws of the Game will be enforced:



Section 2 Glossary –



“Obstruction is an illegal act of impeding an opponent who does not have the ball.”



Point 2



Current interpretation



“It is the responsibility of the decoy runner/s NOT to interfere with the defending team.”



This interpretation remains with the following understanding:



“Any attacking player/s who is in front of the ball must make every endeavour not to interfere with the defending team.”



All other points set out in the 2007 Key Indicators remain unchanged.



Important Note:



In assessing whether obstruction has occurred the referee or video referee will make a judgment call as to whether any defender or defenders were prevented from getting to the ball carrier by the player or players from the attacking team who are in front of the ball.

Source: NRL

:clap: :clap: :clap:
 

Fro

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
8,432
Reaction score
316
Hoo Farkin Ray, its about time this garbage stopped.
 

clontaago

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
6,420
Reaction score
166
Coaches need to alter their attacking slightly and the problem goes away. Scott Prince showed a perfect example the other day. He ran in front of 2 decoy runners who came back on the inside and he showed the ball to both of them. It has the same effect without the obstruction.
 

Dan

Kim Jong Dan
Staff member
Administrator
2018 Tipping Competitor
2019 Tipping Competitor
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
35,657
Reaction score
11,461
that sounds a bit better but doesnt give us the points back we could have had!
 

Fluffy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2004
Messages
21,154
Reaction score
7,845
It still sounds like it will reward a bad reads in defence as long as you are impeded ie if thier is contact but an improvement.
 

ManlyBacker

Winging it
Staff member
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
11,588
Reaction score
972
Harrigan, as a referee co-ordinator, was vey clear a week ago that the rule should be interpreted that way, and then last weekend we get statements from the ref boss and bleating coaches that the rule is stamped as the 11th commandment and any decoys used results in a penalty. Bull****. Get your acts together you idiots as the game is being ruined.
 

Members online

Latest posts

2020 Ladder

Team P W D L PD Pts
1 Panthers 20 18 1 1 299 37
2 Storm 20 16 0 4 258 32
3 Eels 20 15 0 5 104 30
4 Roosters 20 14 0 6 230 28
5 Raiders 20 14 0 6 128 28
6 Rabbitohs 20 12 0 8 169 24
7 Knights 20 11 1 8 47 23
8 Sharks 20 10 0 10 0 20
9 Titans 20 9 0 11 -117 18
10 Warriors 20 8 0 12 -115 16
11 Tigers 20 7 0 13 -65 14
12 Dragons 20 7 0 13 -74 14
13 Sea Eagles 20 7 0 13 -134 14
14 Cowboys 20 5 0 15 -152 10
15 Bulldogs 20 3 0 17 -222 6
16 Broncos 20 3 0 17 -356 6
Top Bottom