Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Huge, post: 2237940, member: 1992"] The real truth about the rules is that some are not set definitively. Concerning stopping the clock crap argument stops the rule from being enforced at all times. The 'rule' does not exist, it is a custom as such .The NRL does not want the clubs to be able to dictate the pace of the game mainly due to it's sickening fawning to the tv rights holders' and their considerations. If clubs could slow things down, simply as a tactic for the whole match then some would use it. Fair enough I say too. Blowing time-off should be the norm . With that said it would inevitably lead onto the notion that time-on should only be blown when the balls back in play . On all occasions. It would be a reasonable argument for no other reason than if it's good enough at the end of a game then why be inconsistent ? 80 whole minutes of action. Walking to scrums and everything you could think of would be excluded if we had some hard rules but no, the NRL and others want rules that are subject to their interpretation. The best games have quality rules. A wonderful example is the hand in the play the ball/tackle. The time taken for the 2 events is so small that it's almost as if there was just one event. At the start of last year the refs were red-hot in that area but since then it has slowly come back. The why is easy, it was too fast. The refs had their own idea of the correct pace of the game so they artificially slowed the game by becoming more forgiving. Sometimes they allow a player to take a quick tap and at others they petulantly sqwalk 'I have'nt given you the mark yet' and then point to the very spot the player had attempted to play on from ! I've seen refs allow time for players to get on side when there was no earthly good reason for doing so. Whims more than hard rules are the order of the day. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Active Now

No members online now.

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)

Reply to thread

Log in

Active Now