THE RL1908 BLOG
News, Reviews & Opinion - Sean Fagan - RL1908.com
Like
bowlers in one-day cricket, the defensive team
in rugby league is not given many favours.
I
sometimes think the game's modern administrators
and on-field officials would prefer to see the
attacking team have free reign, to be the Harlem
Globetrotters, while the defenders are left to
be nothing more than the "stooge" team.
The
past 50 years or so in rugby league have been
a relentless path towards taking more and more
away from the armoury of the defending team.
Sure,
defenders got the limited tackles rule, putting
an end to bash-and-barge football and giving a
regularly share of possession, but even that was
aimed at making the attack more enlivening.
The
ruck setback distance (how far the defenders must
stand back from the play-the-ball) has gone from
nothing (i.e. needing to simply be "on side
at the play-the-ball), to a 1 yard rule, through
the 5m rule of the 70s and 80s, and onto the 10m
rule (or more from some referees!) instigated
mid-way through the 1993 season.
The
idea of gap between the teams was to create space,
to allow creative ball-players to "do their
thing". It was never about speeding up the
game.
But
once the play-the-ball became no longer a contest
for possession, and teams worked out that flat
passes to a "hit up" forward or a dummy-half
scoot gave you 10m and momentum from every tackle,
then suddenly it was all about speed - all about
referees making the defenders release the tackled
player as fast as they could, and too bad if they
were no chance of ever getting back on their feet
and into marker.
And
who hasn't seen the tackled players doing their
best to "milk" penalties from the referee
at almost every play-the-ball? Time after time
we watch the tackled player walk off the mark,
leave the tackled players seemingly "off-side"
or "not square" at marker, and the referee
obliges with a penalty or calls the tacklers to
"Stay out of it!"
As
for the 2009 NRL season's blitz on anyone seemingly
touching a man intent on kicking the ball...
If
a player is in possession of the ball, even on
the toe of his boot, the defenders must be able
to tackle him. That is the game, isn't it?
Sure,
penalise a defender who launches himself at a
kicker when he knows full well he will never arrive
while the attacker still has the ball, but anything
else should be permitted. Defenders can't be left
wondering if a "kicker" suddenly decides
to run, nor let him put his kick wherever he chooses
- how is that fair?
Why
can't the kicker simply stand deeper if he wants
to kick free of being tackled? Heck, haven't we
got a 10m rule today? Try being a kicker when
the ruck distance was zero, or 1 yard, or even
5 metres.
Ask
any rugby league fan - when it comes to enjoying
the game, the defence "ripping in" with
legitimate hard hits is part of its appeal.
Here's
a suggestion to restore some balance to the game...
Seeing
as the play-the-ball is no longer a contest for
possession, can we lighten up on the markers?
Introduce
a rule that says the tacklers need not get to
marker (or be "square") if they tackle
a dummy-half - all the tacklers should need to
do is get back "on side" i.e. on their
team's side of where the ball hit the ground in
the tackle.
Provided
the man playing-the-ball is also made to stop
walking off the mark, this rule change would make
a dummy-half think twice before scooting off,
and it would force the ball to be passed wide
of the ruck, to clear these new "maverick
markers". Let's see the creative attack deal
with those dangers!
By
all means, let's make the defenders release the
tackled or held player as fast as humanly possible,
but how about some recogntion - and reward - for
the tackling team...after all, they did their
job...they tackled and captured their opponents
with the ball, so why should they be punished
so harshly?
|
