The 'downtown' rule

[eagleron]

The most relevant point is: why did the Bunker interfere for such a random rule?
If allowed to continue it gives the Bunker even greater control of match outcomes which, of course, raises the spectre of gambling involvement in the sport.
If a Bunker official is corrupt then games can be manipulated. We are naive to think it doesn't happen.

I don't like the increased involvement the bunker has these days and like general refereeing the nit picking inconsistencies is not only annoying but is affecting the outcome of games, in the past two seasons in particular they've become more and more involved but it only seems to be sometimes, not every game, it makes you wonder if there's an agenda to help certain sides, particularly those0 from areas where the code is under threat from AFL

 

[StuBoot]

I don't like the increased involvement the bunker has these days and like general refereeing the nit picking inconsistencies is not only annoying but is affecting the outcome of games, in the past two seasons in particular they've become more and more involved but it only seems to be sometimes, not every game, it makes you wonder if there's an agenda to help certain sides, particularly those0 from areas where the code is under threat from AFL

Nah, just incopetence.
Take the Drags v Chooks game today, Dragons third try.
Bird caught it in goal but Norman tried to run a block, had no eyes for the ball and the chooks player was denied a fair challenge.
I f&@king saw it in real time and said to my son they’ll check this and rule no try.
But…try confirmed.
It was only after the commentators got wind of the Chooks blowing up did they mention it or replay it.
Didn’t affect the outcome but how does something like that get missed when “The Bunker” is there to run a slide rule over stuff like that.
I’m an average footy fan with no vested interest in the game and saw it straight away , took one look on the rewind button and couldn’t believe it. if l was a Chooks fan I’d have been blowing up.

 

[Will on the hill]

Freddy explained the rule very clearly on the Sunday footy show. If a player is infont of the PTB when the ball is kicked from behind the PTB they are not allowed to be involved in that play in any way. Also said he went through the stats pre origin and 30 players had been called downtown, only one got involved in the play and they were penalised. Seems the players for the most part know the rule and play accordingly.

 

[globaleagle]

Freddy explained the rule very clearly on the Sunday footy show. If a player is infont of the PTB when the ball is kicked from behind the PTB they are not allowed to be involved in that play in any way. Also said he went through the stats pre origin and 30 players had been called downtown, only one got involved in the play and they were penalised. Seems the players for the most part know the rule and play accordingly.

I also thought the ref explained that pretty clearly at the time...

🤷‍♂️

 

[cc eagle]

Freddy explained the rule very clearly on the Sunday footy show. If a player is infont of the PTB when the ball is kicked from behind the PTB they are not allowed to be involved in that play in any way. Also said he went through the stats pre origin and 30 players had been called downtown, only one got involved in the play and they were penalised. Seems the players for the most part know the rule and play accordingly.

I also think where Bennett got confused in the presser by saying " players do it all the time" of course they're in front of the kicker alot of the time but, behind the last play the ball which means they keep 10mts away from the catcher and don't get penalised.

 

[Brissie Kid]

The problem is the NRL taking a sensible rule and then adding to it to stuff it up.

The rules always allowed offside players from a kick. The rules just said its ok to be offside, but you can't get involved until the opponents have run 10m or passed the ball 10m. That's how we had kicking duels.

But in the mid 1980s some players were leaving upfield before their team mate had even played the ball, so the downtown rule was added. I think there was game where a St George player kicked the ball on the last tackle from his own 20m line, but it clipped a Bulldog's hand trying to charge down the ball and was then caught by a St George player 50m upfield, who raced away for a try as he was by the rules onside. But he had headed upfield before the play the ball.

Somewhere in the past few years someone decided to extend the downtown rule to what we saw penalised in the Souths decision. But there was never any reason for the NRL to extend the original downtown rule. It should have been left as it was. The Souths player was onside at the play the ball and in front of the kicker. He was by the rules entitled to go up field even though he was offside, so long as didn't get involved until the Panthers ran/passed 10m.

The NRL just added a rule that no one asked for or needed.

 

[Brissie Kid]

Freddy explained the rule very clearly on the Sunday footy show. If a player is infont of the PTB when the ball is kicked from behind the PTB they are not allowed to be involved in that play in any way. Also said he went through the stats pre origin and 30 players had been called downtown, only one got involved in the play and they were penalised. Seems the players for the most part know the rule and play accordingly.

All good, except the Souths player wasn't in front of the play the ball.

 

[cc eagle]

All good, except the Souths player wasn't in front of the play the ball.

I think you'll find he was

 

[cc eagle]

I think you'll find he was

My apologies, I didn't see the vid

 

[Brissie Kid]

I think you'll find he was

Sorry. I mixed that up. He wasn't in front of the play the ball when the play the ball happened. But he had run past the point of the play the ball when the ball was kicked.

Downtown Chasers
A player is considered ‘downtown’ when: A player who is in front of the kicker in general play who intentionally advances beyond the point of the previous play the ball before the ball has gone past him. https://www.nrl.com/siteassets/operations/documentation/nrl_laws_interpretations_2020.pdf

All said it is a nonsense rule. It makes the other offside rules redundant, but they are still in the book. The NRL hasn't removed from the rules that an offside player can't get involved until the opposition has run 10m.

 

[Will on the hill]

All good, except the Souths player wasn't in front of the play the ball.

That's not the rule, he was in front of the PTB when the ball was kicked.

 

[cc eagle]

That's not the rule, he was in front of the PTB when the ball was kicked.

From the pic he's not in front of the PTB

 

[Will on the hill]

From the pic he's not in front of the PTB

The ball hasn't gone past him yet. By "past" they mean downfield from the kick.

 

[The better Robbo]

The ball hasn't gone past him yet. By "past" they mean downfield from the kick.

100%
A player can not run past the "play the ball" until the ball that has been kicked crosses the play the ball line. It's a good rule! Do we want 6 forwards running up field and only giving Tom 10m of running room? The rule was bought in for this reason and it is a good reason. Teams were sending a number of players forward and they only had to hold back 10m. I believe Jarryd Hayne and Slater were 2 of the big driving forces behind this rule!

 

[pt73]

Annesley covered this in excruciating detail in his Monday waffle fest and concluded it was the correct call.

He then talked about an obstruction call the bunker got wrong in the same game.

No mention of the 11-2 penalty count.

 

[cc eagle]

Vonny asked kenty, " Have you ever heard of Downtown cos I haven't"

 

[The better Robbo]

I'm actually surprised at how many people hadn't heard of this rule. Its rarely enforced but its a known rule surely!

 

[40 years an eagle]

Maybe because it has never been enforced in the last 20 years or so.

 

[eagleron]

Vonny asked kenty, " Have you ever heard of Downtown cos I haven't"

Which begs the question, why is she there rather than an ex player or coach who has a good grounding in the rules of the game?

 

[cc eagle]

The most relevant point is: why did the Bunker interfere for such a random rule?
If allowed to continue it gives the Bunker even greater control of match outcomes which, of course, raises the spectre of gambling involvement in the sport.
If a Bunker official is corrupt then games can be manipulated. We are naive to think it doesn't happen.

It was a touches call not the bunker