The Cumberland Throw

The Spotlight – Six Again? No Thanks!

At a time when the NRL needs the majority of its stakeholders on the same page, I’m somewhat surprised that the decision has been made to introduce a rule change as significant as the six again call.

In my opinion, and let me stress that it’s my opinion and I hope to be wrong, this is a poorly conceived rule thrust upon this year’s Premiership without the benefit of a proper road test.

Adding to my apprehension, reports are emerging that a significant number of prominent players and coaches had voiced their opposition when consulted, yet such concerns have been seemingly brushed aside.

Sharks playmaker, Chad Townsend has spoken out against the change and his objections seem typical of many others – “ I don’t like the six restart proposal and I don’t like the fact that proposals are being put forward at this time. It’s just a time to continue with the product we’ve got.”

And the question must be asked, what is so wrong with our game that integral changes such as one referee AND a six again ruck call are being shoved through just before the May 28 reboot? We have a product that has the opportunity to be showcased to a world calling out for broadcasts of competitive team sports, yet we choose to complicate it for our own participants and supporters. It seems ludicrous!

Whilst we shouldn’t judge the validity of a rule change on the basis of the opinions of players and coaches alone, these blokes are the ones tasked with playing under changed conditions with only a couple of weeks notice.

But let’s not leave it there. Let’s also consider the major player in this rule change – the referee.

I’m concerned about my mate Henry

It is surely counterintuitive to introduce a new ruck rule at the exact time that the second referee, the ruck referee, is removed from the game.

Have the powers that be forgotten about the increased one-on-one strips that two refs had to adjudicate last year? Have they forgotten about other rule changes such as captain’s challenge and scrum positioning?

And what about the biggest stakeholders of all – the fans?

I can only express my opinion in this post, but I hope that platforms such as TCT or other social media sites are used by fans to express their views.

As a supporter, I feel as if the rule has been rushed through under my guard. In the past, when rules have been changed, or at least the interpretations of rules, I’d know that the change was coming. I’d witness significant chunks of preseason training dedicated to opposed sessions with referees applying said rules.

As an individual who’s passionate about the game and its rules, this lack of preparation afforded to players, coaches and referees infuriates me.

Such a significant rule change should have been trialled for a season across Canterbury Cup, Flegg, Ron Massey and Sydney Shield competitions. Data and feedback needed to be gathered and analysed before a decision was made about its introduction to NRL matches. This could have taken place in 2021.

Potential scenarios such as inconsistent application of the rule, or teams not having the opportunity to kick for goal in tight games, can’t be explored or debated at this point because it’s never been faced across multiple games. 

But above all else, with just two weeks until the competition kicks off, the implementation of this rule has as much clarity as a schoolie on a Bali bender. It’s a rule, that for all intents and purposes, seems to have been made on the run.

We can and should do better than that.

 

Eels forever!

Sixties

 

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

57 thoughts on “The Spotlight – Six Again? No Thanks!

  1. Richard Cranium

    Couldn’t agree more. The six again has been trialled once in an All Stars game. It was woeful. Why are they bringing it in now, without proper development or a decent length trial of the rule? It’s lunacy. The NRL need to realise that the constant changing of rules, in the search for perfection, actually takes it further away.
    And one ref? V’Landys has said it was the result of a survey, and the fans want it. 2 points. 1, how many fans took the survey. 2, I’d that was the reason for the change, why wasn’t it done PRIOR to Round 1? Remember the Eels vs Warriors game last year? Forward pass aside, the amount of whinging about the refs getting strips wrong etc was deafening! Now they expect one ref to watch the timing of It, watch the ruck, onside etc? Crazy.
    All this will affect the refs and their standard. We keep overcomplicating rules, and makes it near impossible for the officials to get it right consistently. RL is a simple game. Let’s get back to it. I, for One, will be supporting the whistleblowers. No refs faulting from me. They have a hard enough job. Blame the rules and the interpretations, not the bloke in the middle.

    1. sixties

      Richard, I’m probably going to be on your team regarding the refs. It’s always been a hard gig, but now?

  2. kevin freeman

    I believe ‘six again’ will have a real (positive) impact on the teams that have employed tactics that slow down and the ruck — and spoil the game.
    At long last those teams, and their coach, will have to quickly ‘clear the ruck’ and allow the game to flow — or else give away six more tackles. A great innovation!

    1. Richard Cranium

      It will also take away the penalty goal. You’re up by one with a minute to go, and defending your line. I know what I would be doing 😁

      1. kevin freeman

        Good point. Maybe a penalty could still remain an option? (I’m not sure yet, will need to research more). The bottom line is that the ruck is spoiling the game. Anything to stamp out these delays has got to be beneficial so that teams can “throw the ball around” and generate thrills and spills — rather than head down, bum up, football

        1. sixties

          Kevin, if there is no discretion for the ref to blow a penalty instead, it could make the ruck worse with teams deliberately infringing when defending the line at the end of a close game. But in saying that, none of us know what the rule will be exactly. And therein lies another problem.

          1. kevin freeman

            Showing my age (almost 80) here….BUT…. for far too long the coach has dictated the fabric of our game by ‘massaging’ rules to their advantage.
            And so many critics talk about “what if a penalty is given in the last two minutes of a game. Question: what about an (unfair) penalty given in the first two minutes of game? Why is that any different? Back in the 50’s and 60’s we had a “5 yard rule” in the ruck and then a “3 yard rule” and then a “10 yard rule” all of which were ‘engineered’ by the coaches for their own benefit.
            Then in the 70’s the coaches initiated the Field Goal benefit (two points) and the game revolved around “dozens” of field goal attempts (particularly in those last two minutes).And the game became predictable and somewhat boring too. So much so that the League dropped the value back to only one point. Then the scrums were used by the coach to “gain” a soft penalty worth two points, games were indeed won – and lost – on the numerous ways in which to ‘gain’ a scrum penalty. So the League brought in the scrum differential penalty – meaning a team could not kick for goal from a scrum penalty.

            By now you might be aware of where this post is heading. It has always been a battle between the League Administration (who ‘make’ the rules) and the coaches who try whatever they can to ‘exploit the rules’. Fast forward to last year (or was it the year before?) when the League instructed referees to stamp down on ruck infringements etc., and we had 20 or 30 penalties per game. The coaches ‘blew up’ (of course), the fans were unhappy with so many stoppages, sponsors said the ‘product’ had less appeal AND EVERYBODY BLAMED THE REFERRES! – just what the coaches wanted everybody to do – blame the refs!. So, Greenberg made a big statement that referees were instructed to stop nit-picking and to allow the game to ‘flow’

            Thus the coaches once again ‘won’ and the League ‘lost’ – lets say by a TKO in round six
            and Bellamy & Co were ‘allowed’ to continue with the wrestle and slow rucks because the defence was better ‘set’ each time and so on. This resulted in less penalties AS WELL AS LESS LINE BREAKS Nothing changed as all clubs became better and better once their defence was ‘allowed’ to get set because of the slow rucks and so much wrestle.

            Now, the new administration (V’Landys) are a lot smarter and have said something along the lines of “while we lost the first bout in round six last year by a TKO we now come out for the second, and final bout. now with the SIX AGAIN RULE”. This is the only way to pull the coaches into understanding that we (Admin) run the game and you (Coach) play strictly by our rules.
            He who owns the Gold makes the Rules. HOORAY AT LONG LAST but just wait once again for the protests from coaches proclaiming the poor quality of one referee (too much pressure on one person etc) BULLDUST!!!

            The ‘one referee’ thing just happens to be a minor side-show and will not have any major impact on the game at all. It has lasted well for over 100 years, just like the players, the refs are much fitter — and smarter — these days. And they will be supported by EXPERIENCED Touch Judges!

            Finally technology is great, but ‘analysis / paralysis’ can be dangerous. All replays should be judged at normal speed.

            Now bring on 28th May with SIX TO GO!!!!!!

          2. sixties

            Appreciate your long reply Kevin, but I’ll debate it with one simple comment. If you enforce the current rule, you don’t need a new one. If the defending team offends – penalise them. It’s that simple. Follow that up by allowing the quick tap instead of pulling it up so often. In essence they have created a quick tap rule here, but made the decision open to scrutiny. Debate wouldn’t exist if quick taps were not pulled back because the rules haven’t been changed. Bingo.

          3. BDon

            Sixties, don’t they mostly pull them back because team mate/s are in front of the mark. Will the new rules feature this? Maybe the coaches need to get players thinking about that. And good read Kevin.

          4. Rowdy

            Thanks for your personal opinion on this debate Sixties. I don’t often find myself so polarized against a perspective you have put forward as much as I am in this case. Briefly:
            a) Not pulling up a quick tap as the solution to the ruck wrestle and mess, has had over 10 years to be considered and applied and it has not succeeded.
            b) Something radical had to be introduced to this ruck and wrestle area to open the way for a completely different approach to eradicating the problem/blight on the game.
            c) I believe this rule change will also assist the return to the one referee because it will allow him to call the shots in the ruck and remove the many other voices which have overtaken the policing of the game. Bunker is not allowed to give refs instruction or “tips” until a stoppage in play and of course second ref won’t be there.

          5. Rowdy

            As you are probably now aware Sixties? There is provision for the referee to blow a penalty for a couple of repeated ruck infringements without warning to either team or any need for consultation or explanation with on field quasi referees such as Cam Smith or DCE. This can only be a good thing also.

          6. sixties

            BDon and Rowdy,
            Most of the time they pull back taps that are for the offside penalty or if the penalty is in the attacking ten.. But if it’s a ruck penalty, the chances are that their own team will be inside and there’s no need to call them back.
            Rowdy, in my opinion, you don’t need a new rule if the refs simply enforce the old one. If the refs need a new rule because they can’t enforce an existing rule then they should give it away.

    2. Colin Good

      I consider this as a good rule change,Bellyach will have to rethink his strategy to slow the game down

      1. sixties

        Colin, can you explain how it will work in practise, because I’ve done my research today and I can’t get a straight answer. Not how you think it will work, but the actual rule.

    3. Rowdy

      Totally agree kevin. You have put the argument FOR this rule change very simply and to the point. This is in my opinion the “whole” for the rule change which when added to the one referee will give power to police the ruck back to just one man being the referee. If he applies his interpretation equally to both teams the players will quickly adapt their game to comply…..or lose!

  3. BDon

    Sixties, are you more concerned about the 6 again than the 1 ref? That was my initial reaction, other than timing the 1ref thing doesn’t faze me as much, there are many pro’s and cons, but the 6 again will end up like anything else in the ruck – perfection-lite, exploited and inconsistently applied. The option for the ref to also blow a penalty will be interesting. All too rushed, and yes, ball stripping was the other area that even 2 refs and 2 linespeople couldn’t quite nail. And throw in the bunker there too in the try scoring stripping (Micheal Jennings probably nodding).

    1. sixties

      BDon, I’m more concerned about the 6 again, but the removal of the extra ref with increasing the workload makes no sense. No sense!

  4. parrathruandthru

    The first month there will be a thousand 6 again calls, then the refs will stop calling it until semi final time when it will blitz again
    On the refs its a money saving exercise. I read it will save the NRL $3 million. As far as NRL expenditure goes, that’s one week of spending at $500k a day, surely they can save money elsewhere

  5. Higgsy

    Another V’landys failure This is about saving money not improving the game , mitchell ,ado carr strike one, cleary first time strike two , now altering game mid comp strike 3 , it may be way to go 1 referee but the timing is woeful , there is to many things being done on the run that may create more problems than we already have , maybe im wrong about the outcome but not about the timing !

  6. Greg Okladnikov

    I think both are major changes are very rushed and no definite reason why. Cost saving for one referee – if that is the reason we are in trouble. The ruck rule change – its a major change – how can it be brought in when no fans / players or coaches were asking for it. Hopefully it is not a case of the new bosses just doing what they want, without an understanding of the game, or the impact on the game. 2 big changes with no testing in lower grades and not all coaches agreeing ? I cant see the benefit of either

    1. sixties

      Greg, it has that feel of new bosses pushing unnecessary change. The six again rule is a massive change.

    1. Richard Cranium

      Not if the ref rules six again, which they’re now supposed to for ruck infringements in lieu of a penalty

    2. sixties

      Colin, can you provide the official statement on the rule that says that? I can’t find that anywhere, nor could I find anyone who could clarify it.

  7. Rocket

    I like the six again call as long as refs use it.

    Call held when forward momentum is stopped as the rule book states instead of allowing three and four players to rush in and then call dominant tackle. Of course multiple players will dominate one attacker.

    I hate when the defensive player looks at the ref and waits to be told to let go of the attacking player. If you have time to look around let go.
    I think when they started inviting some coaches in to ask how the game should be adjudicated they lost the plot.
    Rant over!

    1. sixties

      Rocket, they merely have to allow the quick tap from the penalty instead of pulling the players back so often. Surely that’s the simple option.

      1. Rowdy

        I would be Sixties, if it was allowed to flow in a perfect footy game, but it doesn’t. Penalties generally give both teams a rest before the reset with a tap. That is part of the problem that I believe this new rule to (play on with six again signal) will also give greater opportunity to address.

        1. sixties

          Rowdy there are countless times in a season when a team tries to take a quick tap. Let them do it.
          Any way, it’s pointless me pushing my argument because the rule is in. Let the mess begin.

  8. Milo

    I get it about the change during the season but this is a season where we have had a long break; financial issues have been found out a CEO or two moved on and they have had time to re-do some items. Shock we have even seen players not social distance and get off lightly…..the same story but different year.
    The 6 to go i will wait and see but if it helps the ruck then i am for it; and i did see somewhere that they can penalise? I thought i saw this mentioned somewhere and sin binning? If you cannot shoot for goal and its a GF then so be it…you would have had a few months to get used to it.
    The refs i am for anything that gets rid of them yelling in the players ears near the ruck and the incessant 2nd ref with various calls being inconsistent. The 2009 GF was the last time we have one ref and they went to two and teams (yes teams) have again been allowed through their coaches to bend the rules (wrestle) in all sorts of ways; one or ten refs just let them referee and if they blow the pea out of then so be it….coaches cannot be allowed to bitch and complain and then the NRL give in like Todd G did in 2018 when we had the crackdown. This does not give coaches much time to again plan to break the rules. They will always whinge like us fans.
    It may not be the best time to amend some rules but we have had a break in the comp.
    The players are lucky to be back playing imo….sorry but so many people have lost out and yet we have a game to watch in two weeks. I just hope we do not have players and or clubs / NRL stuffing it up……

    1. sixties

      I have no problem with going back to one ref Milo, but you’ve almost answered my gripe when you said “I thought I read..”. There just isn’t any clarity, and at a time when we should be very clear, I haven’t been able to get an answer about how the rule will be implemented by refs, and there’s only 2 weeks till kick off.
      I hope I’m wrong.
      I hope that it’s a genius rule.
      But I reckon the first thing that coaches will do is to have lots of dummy half darts to catch offside markers. Will this constitute a six again? I don’t know. Again, I don’t know. Will the play start looking like Super League with ultra quick ruck play that made the game resemble touch footy? Damn I hope not.

      1. Milo

        “An attacking team cannot request a penalty instead of getting another set but referees will retain the right to issue a full penalty and place players in the sin bin for persistent ruck infringements and professional fouls”.

        I am not sure if these reporters have it as fact or have interpreted this.
        This was on the NRL website Sixties. So to me this means the refs have the discretion and while i agree with this i also see this may be different as per who referees each team.But to me this has some merit. Anything to speed up the game is good and I am not advocating touch football but the game has become slow. Stoppages for scrums, stoppages when teams get a penalty etc. We do not want dummy half runs as per 2001 when Parra used Drew at times, we just need teams to eliminate the scourge of the wrestle…I am personally sick of reading ‘ wrestle is part of the game’.

        As Billy Idol says. ‘I love my footy’. but not the other stuff that comes with it….coaches have always complained, let them i say. Refs should always be allowed to referee as per the rule book without complaints about penalties etc.

        1. sixties

          That was not on the NRL site until late yesterday arvo, after I had done my research and published the post. Up to that point, I hadn’t been able to get a definitive answer on how it would be implemented.
          Milo, this tells me it will discretionary. Hello can of worms! Hello extra pressure on one ref. Hello flooding through the middle third and dummy half runs (that’s Cooper Cronk’s early thoughts on tactics). That means hello Super League.
          I just don’t like it Milo.

          1. Milo

            It could also mean Hello J Ribot and hello China, but maybe not until trade restrictions are lifted 🙂

          2. Richard Cranium

            And if the ref has the discretion to blow a penalty, wait for the usual calls of bias or incompetence. It’s either a penalty or not.

          3. Rowdy

            The dummy half running is a given Sixties, but it wasn’t so bad for us in 2001 when Tony Archer, for us the top referee allowed it and penalized the opposition mercilessly to our advantage……Consider this then. If that is the major consequence of this rule change and we eradicate the wrestle in the ruck, which option do you choose my friend? For me? Anything to be rid of the wrestle.

          4. sixties

            As I said above Rowdy, I think it’s an absurdity to intro an untried rule, now, when a rule already exists for quick taps. But it’s in, so it doesn’t matter what I believe. Let’s hope I’m wrong.

        2. Anonymous

          Milo not often I disagree with Sixties but I am rowing your boat at the moment. The other thing that was in the article is that the “Professional foul will be ruled without warning

          Valandys is different to TG in that he is a benevolent dictator and not a reactor. He has stated that he is on a mission to eliminate the wrestle

          We will see where this all ends up soon enough. My biggest hate at the moment outside the wrestle is the new rule allowing strips once the second defender drops off. It adds nothing to the spectacle of the game

          John Eel

          1. Milo

            Thanks John, your last paragraph will tell where we are in 12 months and if V’Landys has been successful or not. I am for it albite cautiously and i for one like that he has made the call as some bosses do this. I guess my view is let the coaches / fans etc complain and i go back to 2018 when the refs cracked down and yes we complained but then the NRL backed off whereby they should have persisted in my view to see players / coaches come into line with the crackdown. Anyway time will tell mate.
            The strips are the same for me – too much confusion.
            Again all fouls will be great if the refs are consistent in the interpretation….and i hope they crackdown on captains slowing the play with their questioning…..

          2. sixties

            Milo, back in 2018, I reckon most of the complaints were about what would happen, and it was proven correct. I was dead against the crack down because I knew it would only last for a few weeks. It happened every time they did a crack down. I’ve said in a couple of replies today, that you just have to enforce the rules. Penalise and let the team take quick taps instead of pedantically pulling them back.

          3. Milo

            You are right mate, we all knew it would stop and that is my point, if they persisted it would / could have made coaches abide by the rule, yet the NRL gave in. Enforce the rule as it is and draw that line in the sand….

          4. sixties

            Understood John, but you’ve also added to my argument. An issue I have is the workload on refs with this new rule. Throw in the strip ruling and it’s not an easy situation for one ref. Just enforce the previous rule. If you offend, the penalty happens – allow the quick tap instead of pulling it back.
            By the way, I hate the wrestle, but I also don’t want to see the flooding through the middle third that I suspect we’ll now see.

        3. Rowdy

          I read and understood the rule same as you Milo, on Friday! I’m only sorry I didn’t have time to support your argument then. There has clearly been much more evaluation of the hypothetical than some/most people believe. The few abuses of the new rule will become clear pretty quickly IMO and will then be addressed.

          1. Milo

            Yes Rowdy the abuses will begin v soon during the opening rounds i believe too. I read this morning about Fox and 9 asking for changes to interchange to make the same more attractive etc for views. This is good but again how the game is policed will be key. We want a balance between the no wrestle and the tough football type events. I recall Parra in 2001 recording some huge wins and also games with 54-28 scorelines…..

      2. Rocket

        I think the refs will police the six again more often when the attacking team is within the 10 meters of the try line.

        1. sixties

          Rocket, I guess we all have to assume or think how it will play out as we don’t know. Therein lies another issue. With the game returning, we have a rule that we haven’t seen before.

  9. paul taylor

    Boys I get a touch footy feel of it. Tap and run and keep the ball in play at all costs. The one ref deciding on the tackle, the strip, the holding on, the third man in – easier to call the 6 again and keep the flow. Teams with good second phase and off the cuff may excel because it will all be coming down to the speed of the ruck and how quickly you can get to your feet knowing that a sloppy hold is going to get you 6 again.

    Reward for effective tacklers is massive. Imagine , grassing tackles and only having two in the tackle without having to have 3 and having your line set all the time.

    To be honest – this is could go pear shaped very quickly .

    1. sixties

      I’ve had some knowledgeable people express the same thoughts to me as you did Paul. I’ve also heard/read proponents of the one ref say this brings us back into line with international rugby league, yet in the same moment we introduce a unique rule?
      Above all else I have sympathy for the refs. I know that I will probably blow up about calls under this rule. I hope I don’t express too much of my displeasure at the refs.

  10. Shelley

    When you paint the walls in a house you go get a sample, put it on a wall that can be hidden and wait a few days to see if you like it. You probably also don’t ask your grandparents for colour suggestions and wait until you can paint all the walls so that it looks good when it is finished.

    The NRL on the other hand is making changes and big decisions based upon a few suggestions from dinosaurs like Gould and Rothfield with no idea how it will look, what the impact will be and also how quickly players/ referees can adjust.

    While we can joke about it we are asking fans and most importantly sponsors to stay loyal, to keep paying money they probably don’t really have and we have no real idea if the product they will now be watching/ sponsoring is better or worse.

    I have zero faith in the ARLC or NRL and certainly not the media. I am and will stay loyal to Parra and keep supporting my club but I am fed up with all the rest and won’t put money into their pockets via origin etc. I am convinced there is some serious dodgy business going on within the bodies/ commission who run our game. The sad thing is I love league and generally think in my daily life that the glass is half full so if I feel this disillusioned I think league is in trouble.

    1. sixties

      That’s some very strong opinions Shelley. I don’t have any concerns about decisions being nefarious, I just don’t agree with the rushed nature of this implementation. It’s a major rule change that I believe will cause problems, not solve them. As I’ve said to others, we already had the capacity for quick taps from penalties, the refs had to simply stop pulling them back.

Leave a Reply

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

%d bloggers like this: