The Cumberland Throw

A Play The Ball Crackdown Is Coming – Let’s Find A Long Term Solution

Beware NRL supporters!

The annual crackdown on play the ball infringements is about to cast its ugly shadow over the opening rounds of the NRL Premiership.

Instead of marvelling at the skills, the collisions and the breathtaking moments that define the great game of rugby league, we are likely to instead experience the frustration of referees blowing the pea out of the whistle as they follow the latest mandate about which rules to enforce.

What is even more head scratching about this edict is that it appears to be a very recent decision.

Let me clarify this.

I have attended every Eels pre-season field session at their Old Saleyards base this year. On Thursdays, the NRL referees provide officials for full field opposed sessions. It’s a tremendous arrangement used by most clubs which provides benefits for both the teams and the referees.

However, in the first opposed session of February the referees suddenly started penalising the team in possession for incorrect play the balls. This was mirrored in an opposed session later that day between Wenty and the Eels Jersey Flegg squad controlled by a NSWRL official. I counted at least 20 stoppages during the session for that single offence.

The referees, including their supervisor Jared Maxwell, took the time to explain to the players and coaches why the penalties were being awarded. They were at pains to communicate this as clearly as possible – and this was very evident as I watched them demonstrate the actions which were causing a breach.

But why has this rule suddenly been applied?

It’s difficult to argue with the importance of cleaning up the ruck. And, there’s nothing wrong with referees applying the rules rather than “managing” matches. However, if history is anything to go by, we will witness this rule being policed for a few weeks before it disappears into that deep pool of unenforced rugby league laws. This is possibly the greatest frustration for NRL fans.

Which then begs the question – how much is achieved when the inevitable short term enforcement occurs?

Unfortunately, the answer is that nothing changes.

The question could also be asked – why just enforce using the foot to heel the ball?  In fact, it’s worthwhile examining the other rules applying to the play the ball.

Let’s go to an excerpt from the official source:
Rugby League Laws of the Game – International Level
2018 Edition (as applied to the NRL Telstra Premiership)

Section 11. The Tackle and Play the Ball

The play-the-ball shall operate as follows.

Release Tackled Player Immediately

(a) The tackled player shall be immediately released and shall not be touched until the ball is in play.

Regain Feet

(b) The tackled player shall without delay regain his feet where he was tackled, lift the ball clear of the ground, face his opponent’s goal line and place the ball on the ground in front of his foremost foot.

Player Marking

(c) One opponent may take up the position immediately opposite the tackled player.
(d) The tackled player may not play-the-ball before the players effecting the tackle have had time to clear the ruck.

Play With Foot

(e) When the ball touches the ground it must be heeled (i.e. backwards) by the tackled player. The ball must not be kicked or heeled by the player marking him.
The ball is in play when it has been played
backward.

Acting Halfback


(f) A player of each team, to be known as the acting halfback, may stand immediately and directly behind his own player taking part in the play-the- ball and must remain in this position, until the play-the-ball movement is complete.

 

Let’s now consider each section above and critique how the rules are applied in the NRL.

Rule 11a) Is the tackled player properly released and allowed to play the ball without interference?

In my opinion, this is the greatest blight in the ruck. From hands all over the ball, to leaning on the  tackled player as he rises to his feet, the referees could literally penalise at least once in every set. But they don’t. When they do, a term like crowding is used. But is there anything in the rule which dictates the amount of space which should be given? I can’t find the word “crowding” in the rules.

Nonetheless, what we do witness is the defending team pushing the bounds looking for the reward of forcing an incorrect play the ball or a lost possession. There should be no 50/50 calls here. According to the laws of the game, the tackled player cannot be touched until after the ball has been played.

Rule 11b) Has the tackled player risen to his feet and faced the opponent’s goal line?

Given some of the comical incidents allowed to pass muster, the conclusion must be that the interpretation is whether the player has attempted to face the goal line.

Tacklers do their best to position the tackled player in awkward positions by spinning them around or forcing them onto their back. It could be claimed that incorrect play the balls with this infringement are as much about disorientation as they are about trying to gain the advantage from a rapid play the ball.

This classic fail from the 2011 Grand Final that was deemed fine speaks for itself.

Rule 11c) Is there only one opponent in the marker position?

This rule can be interpreted as relating to rule 11f. There should only be one marker, not double markers. When the play gets closer to the goal line, you often see two markers split apart before the ball is played. Perhaps the application of the rule comes down to whether the referee is playing an advantage

Rule 11d) Has the tackled player played the ball too quickly?

I’m not sure how often this rule is applied. It isn’t to be confused with the tackled player not rising to his feet. It’s whether the defender has been afforded the time to clear the ruck.  Is it possible that incidents involving the tackled player stepping over the tackler then playing the ball back into that defender are examples of breaking this rule.

Given the prevalence of the wrestle and the time taken for this to be effected, perhaps this rule is rarely applicable.

Rule 11e) Has the ball been heeled backwards by the tackled player?

 

The history of this rule relates to the play the ball being a contest between the tackled player and the marker. Rolling the ball back meant an unfair advantage in the contest. These days, rolling the ball back creates an advantage via the speed and smooth delivery of the ball to the dummy half.

Previously, the referees have been lenient if the player looks as if they’ve made an attempt to use their foot. It appears likely that the foot must now be used.

Rule 11f) Is the second marker square?

As per rule 11c, there can only be one player in the marker position, and the acting halfback – or second marker – must be standing directly behind the marker. On the rare occasion that this rule is enforced, it’s not uncommon to see the referee make an error in his judgement. That’s rugby league, I suspect.

One other point about this rule – it doesn’t appear to specify how far back the second marker should stand behind the marker. Is it one metre? Five metres? We all expect the second marker to be directly behind the marker, but what is permissible and what isn’t?

 

With all of the above rules relating to the play the ball, it’s interesting that only one is deemed worthy of a crackdown. Of course we don’t want a scenario where every rule applicable in the game is suddenly and vigorously applied. The elite level of the NRL has travelled so far down the path of game management that it’s near impossible to turn around and close the gate behind us.

So let’s, for one moment, suppose that every follower of the game is in the NRL’s corner. We want players to use their feet in every play the ball. Let’s also assume, as we must, that every player is therefore coached to do so. Can we then suppose that infringements might then come from fatigue or flaws in technique?

A Solution For Long Term Change?

Perhaps the best solution would be to alter the consequence.

A lost ball or a ball accidentally heeled in the wrong direction is currently deemed an error, with a scrum being ordered by the referee. This should also be the consequence for a ball not heeled.

it would be a high price to pay if a game, or a season, was decided by a penalty in a kickable distance against the team in possession. Equally, if a game has been littered with play the ball infringements, would we be happy if a similar infringement was ignored just because of a result determining circumstance?

If not heeling the ball resulted in a scrum and not a penalty, there would arguably be a greater likelihood that the referees would continue to enforce the law – and supporters would be less inclined to be up in arms. Ultimately, long term change could be achieved.

We all want a game that adheres to the rules. What we don’t want is short term pain for zero gain.

Rugby League forever!

Sixties

If you liked this article, you might consider supporting The Cumberland Throw.

26 thoughts on “A Play The Ball Crackdown Is Coming – Let’s Find A Long Term Solution

  1. Anthony

    I’ve been watching this game for a long time now, and played a little in my younger days, and I did not notice or realise that the rule had changed where the marker could not compete for the ball during the play-the-ball. With this knowledge now, I do need to ask the question, why then is it necessary for the ball to be heeled back if there is no longer a need to offer a competitive opportunity? This is now going to frustrate me even more if they crack down on this particular rule.

    I for one want to see a hard crack down on players hands on the ball and on the player when getting up to play the ball. This is a real beef of mine and erks me no end. Melbourne are a grade above others but they’re not Robinson Crusoe. It is becoming rampant across the game and is the one thing that needs to be curtailed. Ass soon as the ref calls held, and there is still a hand or arm wrapped around the ball, penalise them.

    Whilst I’m on it, I also want to see a crack down on players standing next to the play the ball, especially on tackle 5 acting as blockers. I’m sure there is a rule about how far you need to be from the ruck. Wayne Bennett coached teams are the best at it, but again, it is now rife, nearly as rife as Billy Slater sliding into a player scoring a try with his feet.

    Anyway, thanks sixties, it’ll be an intriguing start to the season from the whistle blowers.

    1. sixties Post author

      I agree with you Anthony about the interference to the tackled player – and as I said I regard it as the biggest blight in the game. As far as blockers beside a play the ball, the attacking team, like the defending team, is allowed one acting half. By definition such blockers are not allowed in this position and should be penalised.

  2. Gol

    I like the idea of using scrums or a handover for these kinds of rule breaches. I always go back to the deciding penalty against Fuifui in the 09 grand final, the very definition of a 50/50 call that, either way it was called with the rules as they are, would probably have decided the grand final by giving generous field position to one team or the other.

    The play the ball badly needed fixing after the farce of last year, what worries me is that it took the referees until February to make the decision. It should have been decided in about July last year, but held until the off season since the only thing worse than a four week crackdown to start the year is a four week crackdown in the middle of the year, I remember an Eels/Panthers game out at Penrith being ruined by what turned out to be a one game crackdown on I believe this very rule, touching the ball with the foot.

    It is also very interesting that the letter of the law requires the ball carrier to allow the marker to get into place, enforcing that rule could bring back the grassing tackle that is now essentially punished. That would completely change the game today if it was enforced properly. There could be an argument made for more exhibition games at the end of the season, either representative football or an All Stars like contest where the result doesn’t really matter, that allows the NRL to experiment with rule changes. Using end of season games with no finals relevance to test rule changes could also be a way to go.

    1. sixties Post author

      Goo, I remember the farce of that Eels v Panthers game. It was all the more frustrating because the crackdown pretty much ended after one round.
      The grassing tackle has pretty much been lost because of how disadvantaged a sole tackler is under modern interpretations (not the actual rules)
      Do we need to trial a change that is simply changing the consequence from a penalty to a scrum?

  3. Milo

    Great read Sixties and i agree. The refs encforcing a scrum would help and be less controversial; also players should be made to play the ball on the mark; and not walk forward, they should be made to go back; this would make sure they did not speed up the ruck; as the marker was always told to hold the mark…..
    Gol that penalty with Fui was right in front and i recall Parra had the ascendancy too….a 50/50 call and some may say it altered the swing of the game.
    Sixties there are many issues with the rules or the interpretations of them; for example how often do we see tacklers holding onto to the players; or holding them upright and ‘slowly’ peeling off. We know which teams do this the best and then get the defence set for the next ruck; i absolutely loathe the way the ruck etc has dominated the game whereby we hear some say ‘whoever wins the ruck wins the game’. It should not be this way.
    Brisbane and Nth Qld games always seem to be quicker games based on skill – that is what fans enjoy i think; and not the slow ruck etc type matches.

    1. John Eel

      Milo last season there was an attempt to stop the attacking player moving forward after the tackle. It has annoyed me for years and the referees forcing the attacking player to get back to the mark seemed to work

      1. Milo

        Yes it annoyed me too; i guess years ago players were penalised for things like this. But i take the point. Refs can determine the sway of matches in the first 20 mins with the ruck….

        1. John Eel

          For a number of years Referees have argued that players who move forward in possession penalise themselves by reducing the 10 metres. However I believe that the current approach is the best one, moving players beck to the mark. By doing this it takes away the momentum of the attacking side

  4. Milo

    Sixties i have to ask, do you not like Manly?
    Melbourne games would have been good to see as examples for above….you could have had the ref wearing the No. 9 as well.

    1. sixties Post author

      Ha! Understood mate. My tech expert, Forty, did a great job of finding and creating GIFS for me – on short notice. Like all Eels fans, I have the utmost respect for both Manly and the Storm.

  5. conway

    Oh sixties…..so I’ll try and control my emotions at reading your objective and sensible comments and appraisal……so if you can see the overall picture regarding the play the ball matter and Anthony can see it and Gol can see it and Milo can see it and I can see it and I daresay any reasonable observer of the game can see it……….. why can”t those who administer the game see it ??????
    But the status of the ruck did not occur overnight. It is the result of arbitrary interpretation and tolerance over years especially but not only ,by those who INSTRUCT the referees which has led to a lack of any real attention to control a pivotal possession area of the game. Yes, it will ultimately be of no benefit to have a temporary clampdown on a particular play the ball issue.
    I just feel that if the rules are consistently and uniformly refereed to, everybody should know where they stand. I personally have grown tired of the demand for spectacle at all costs, especially when it is the integrity of the game which is asked to pay.

    1. Milo

      I can agree Conway; the GF was a good case in point. The end result spoke for itself; but the first 10-20 min allowed one team latitude and they took it.
      I think the NRL have to wake up; we see teams encroach on the 10 m often and not much is done; and the ruck has allowed to get like this because coaches will push the rule and then others will follow. The coaches would know which refs blow more penalties than others (stats would help this and they would research it and more). The referees only need to enforce the rules; and i am a dinosaur who would be happy with one referee

  6. Trouser Eel

    I find the refs “interpret” the rules to try and make sure the outcome is fair. They don’t ping someone for not heeling the ball because to do so seems to be a big injustice for an incidental procedure which is a relic from another rule that was abandoned long ago.

    I think with the attacking players infringements in playing the ball – as it’s almost uniformly about trying to do it quickly, why not just make them do it again (ie no penalty, no scrum, just go back and do it again until the ref is satisfied it’s been done right) Much like they do with the offload that occurs simultaneously to the “held” call.
    This introduces a new level of penalty which allows the refs to enforce and brings a scale of penalty that matches the infringement.

    If you like that idea, let’s talk about a 5 minute sin bin.

  7. John Eel

    Of all of those rules pertaining to the “Play the Ball”, the first one, “Section 11. The Tackle and Play the Ball,

    The play-the-ball shall operate as follows.
    Release Tackled Player Immediately

    (a) The tackled player shall be immediately released and shall not be touched until the ball is in play.

    Should this rule be enforced I think that most of the other issues would take care of themselves. Don’t get me wrong I believe that the Eels have become as proficient as most at slowing down the ruck but it was do or die.

    When you look at old games you cansee how much the speed of the play the ball has slowed and it hurts the game as a spectacle.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: