Official Trial Match Day Thread: Roosters v Tigers

[King Salvo]

Thank you waylander for straightening it up and speaking sense.

Third man is definitely not the issue, the techniques being used have clearly changed and that’s the issue.

Then why do they have penalties for tackles such as the cannonball/hipdrop/prowler/chicken wing etc tackles for instances - these are performed by the C Defender (3rd defender in ) and not by the A or B Defender.

Not sure your grasping the impact on the game the third defender has had which even Phil Gould said should never have been allowed. Only came in as I said when coaches whinged about how they couldn't defend as the play the ball was too quick to set their defence- all that encouraged was the wrestling and judo rubbish and negative over structured play in attack - multiple hit ups, out the back with decoys and kick on the last.

In 2002 it wasn't gang tackling -it was the chooks defence line speed - they exploited the ruck rule - the defensive line would move as soon as the attacking player placed to ball on the ground and not when it was played backwards giving them an advantage in meeting the ball carrier before the advantage line.

They changed that and now the defensive line can only move when the ref calls Go

[Dr. Voodoo Man]

Please post this in the lower grades section.

[Waylander]

Then why do they have penalties for tackles such as the cannonball/hipdrop/prowler/chicken wing etc tackles for instances - these are performed by the C Defender (3rd defender in ) and not by the A or B Defender.

You should have let Tyrell Fuimaono know about this - he just got 5 weeks for performing a hip-drop in a one-on-one tackle.

These moves are penalised for the same reason head-high tackles and taking out a kickers legs are penalised - they are very dangerous and can lead to severe and/or permanent injury. It really is complete nonsense to blame these tackles entirely on the third man in.

[King Salvo]

OK, lets say you got your wish and we only ever allowed 2 in the tackle. Good bye Luke Keary, Sam Walker and any other small stature player. Let's run out with 8 or 9 Asofa-Solomona's plus a few speed men (who also will be 100kgs +) because that's what would happen.

So before they allowed the C Defender (third defender in) these little blokes seemed to manage okay in defense though.

It's rubbish that you need A , B and C defenders(3) in tackles though as it is all about slowing the play the ball down only - the wrestling and judo rubbish.

I.E the Collins incident - 2 Chook A and B Defenders (Manu and Whyte) had hold of Hastings a 5/8-Half and could have easily completed the tackle but no they hold him up for the C Defender (Collins) to come in for the wrestle and what not to slow the play the ball down.

It was good to see in one of the Central Coast Roosters games on the weekend -Laurie Daley cup the half and 5/8 defending on the wing at times - not sure why they don't normally or at least one in

i.e half or 5/8 /Wing/Centre/Backrower

or

Wing / 5/8 or Half/Centre/Backrower

Why is it they have to defend like the following

Wing/ Centre/ 5/8 or half/ Backrower

or even at times

Wing/Centre/Backrower/ 5/8 or half.

It crazy when you think of it as obviously the opposition will target them in defence under the current defence setup of defending 3 or 4 in - be harder to target them in defence on the wing though for an example - winger can still drop back for the general field kicks and also move back to wing for the attacking kicks.

[King Salvo]

You should have let Tyrell Fuimaono know about this - he just got 5 weeks for performing a hip-drop in a one-on-one tackle.

These moves are penalised for the same reason head-high tackles and taking out a kickers legs are penalised - they are very dangerous and can lead to severe and/or permanent injury. It really is complete nonsense to blame these tackles entirely on the third man in.

did you see the Collins tackle by chance

[Waylander]

did you see the Collins tackle by chance

Of course I did, which is irrelevant.

These tackles are NOT the sole domain of the 3rd man in, as evidenced by the Fuimaono incident I referenced. To claim so is demonstrably false. That's my point. What's yours?

[King Salvo]

Of course I did, which is irrelevant.

These tackles are NOT the sole domain of the 3rd man in, as evidenced by the Fuimaono incident I referenced. To claim so is demonstrably false. That's my point. What's yours?

Where cannonball/hipdrop/prowler/chicken wing etc tackles prevalent prior to the third defender in though? - I don't recall they were. I also seem to recall the 3rd defender in was a penalty as well until they changed it to allow this because of coaches whinging it was too hard to defend.

Even though Fuimaono tackle was a one on one the method of tackle (hip drop) is used by the third defender in and they are obviously taught this

Phil Gould - "When we started seeing the third man in around the legs, and I remember Bill Harrigan was the referees' boss at the time, I said, 'nip it in the bud straight away, I don't like where this is going',"

Another dangerous tackle with the third defender in is when they pin the legs of the attacking player together and the other two upright defenders pull or push the attacking player backwards over the third defender. That's a receipe for serious injury to the ball carrier

The third defender in was basically the catalyst for all this wresting and judo rubbish and resulted in unsavory tackle techniques such as the cannonball / hipdrop/prowler/chicken wing/grapple/missile/choker etc etc and the rubbish over structured "attack" of multiple hit ups, out the back with decoys and kick on the last.

A few teams have changed their attack and are moving the ball more side to side as a result of rule changes - set restarts for an example - but smany teams are still stuck in over structured game plan mode.

Move it or lose it (the game)

[Headless Chook]

So before they allowed the C Defender (third defender in) these little blokes seemed to manage okay in defense though.

It's rubbish that you need A , B and C defenders(3) in tackles though as it is all about slowing the play the ball down only - the wrestling and judo rubbish.

I.E the Collins incident - 2 Chook A and B Defenders (Manu and Whyte) had hold of Hastings a 5/8-Half and could have easily completed the tackle but no they hold him up for the C Defender (Collins) to come in for the wrestle and what not to slow the play the ball down.

It was good to see in one of the Central Coast Roosters games on the weekend -Laurie Daley cup the half and 5/8 defending on the wing at times - not sure why they don't normally or at least one in

i.e half or 5/8 /Wing/Centre/Backrower

or

Wing / 5/8 or Half/Centre/Backrower

Why is it they have to defend like the following

Wing/ Centre/ 5/8 or half/ Backrower

or even at times

Wing/Centre/Backrower/ 5/8 or half.

It crazy when you think of it as obviously the opposition will target them in defence under the current defence setup of defending 3 or 4 in - be harder to target them in defence on the wing though for an example - winger can still drop back for the general field kicks and also move back to wing for the attacking kicks.

What do you mean before they 'allowed the third defender in'? The third defender has always been allowed in. There has never been a rule saying that you were only allowed a certain amount of defenders in the tackle. That's why small guys have always had a place in our game, because they could put their body in front of a bigger man and get help from their team mates.

Now lets assume you got your way....Kikau slices through the defence in the GF, Teddy comes across in cover gets a hold of a leg and Toops comes into help out and Kikau is still moving forward. Meanwhile all the other Roosters defenders sit back and twiddle their thumbs because you're only allowed two in the tackle. Kikau gets across and wins the game for his team.....bit of a farce!

[King Salvo]

What do you mean before they 'allowed the third defender in'? The third defender has always been allowed in. There has never been a rule saying that you were only allowed a certain amount of defenders in the tackle. That's why small guys have always had a place in our game, because they could put their body in front of a bigger man and get help from their team mates.

Now lets assume you got your way....Kikau slices through the defence in the GF, Teddy comes across in cover gets a hold of a leg and Toops comes into help out and Kikau is still moving forward. Meanwhile all the other Roosters defenders sit back and twiddle their thumbs because you're only allowed two in the tackle. Kikau gets across and wins the game for his team.....bit of a farce!

No there was some rule about a third man in - it may have been stealing the ball if already two in the tackle?. Changed to only one in a tackle now

Current interpretation of the third man in - refs need to be more vigilant and call held and release much earlier than they currently do to eliminate the third man in rubbish. i.e when the two defenders are holding the ball carrier upright waiting for a third man in - Ref can call held and release before that third man comes in - it's simply fixed

Third Man In

When a player in possession is held in an upright position by two defenders, any other defender[s] must make initial contact to the player in possession above the knees/knee joint. Regardless of the point of impact, a player can still be penalised for any ‘forceful, dangerous or unnecessary contact’ at the legs that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to the player in possession. In relation to this type of tackle, the Referees will call ‘held’ and then ‘release’.

I agree with Phil Gould on this as per his statement below

Phil Gould - "When we started seeing the third man in around the legs, and I remember Bill Harrigan was the referees' boss at the time, I said, 'nip it in the bud straight away, I don't like where this is going',"

Rules can be flexible as we have seen - set restarts for an example - teams in possession in their own 40 will receive a penalty for ruck or 10 metre infringements from this season instead of a set restart. Outside these 40 metre areas it will be set restarts.

You can steal or strip the ball when more than one defender in a tackle when a player in possession is attempting to ground the ball for a try

If there are two or more defender[s] effecting the tackle and the ball is stolen a penalty should be awarded, except if the player in possession is attempting to ground the ball for a try

So in your example - there can be more than 2 in a tackle if the player in possession is attempting to score and or or ground the ball for a try.

It can be easily fixed as I said above to rid the game of the third man in rubbish and unsavory tackles - i.e cannonball / hipdrop/prowler/chicken wing/grapple/missile/choker etc.

Surely a win win for the game and especially the fans and current and future players and fans.

Nothing worse than to see the game degenerate to a wrestle /judo contest and the league and all clubs are to blame.

It seems the most important person on a clubs staff nowadays is the wrestling/judo coach instead of clubs hiring staff who can really teach players how to tackle and attack and play the game the way it should be.

The product is suffering and has been for years as a result of not only the wrestling/judo nonsense but also with the over structured negative multiple hits ups,out the back with decoys and kick on the last rubbish they call the attack.

May as well have 17 robots out there for each team as the majority play the same way- a few teams have changed it up by moving away from the over structured negative "attack" at least and are moving the ball more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L23Ph2gjpSM

https://wwos.nine.com.au/nrl/nrls-bi...a-840adabb5613

[Headless Chook]

No there was some rule about a third man in - it may have been stealing the ball if already two in the tackle?. Changed to only one in a tackle now

Current interpretation of the third man in - refs need to be more vigilant and call held and release much earlier than they currently do to eliminate the third man in rubbish. i.e when the two defenders are holding the ball carrier upright waiting for a third man in - Ref can call held and release before that third man comes in - it's simply fixed

Third Man In

When a player in possession is held in an upright position by two defenders, any other defender[s] must make initial contact to the player in possession above the knees/knee joint. Regardless of the point of impact, a player can still be penalised for any ‘forceful, dangerous or unnecessary contact’ at the legs that involves an unacceptable risk of injury to the player in possession. In relation to this type of tackle, the Referees will call ‘held’ and then ‘release’.

I agree with Phil Gould on this as per his statement below

Phil Gould - "When we started seeing the third man in around the legs, and I remember Bill Harrigan was the referees' boss at the time, I said, 'nip it in the bud straight away, I don't like where this is going',"

Rules can be flexible as we have seen - set restarts for an example - teams in possession in their own 40 will receive a penalty for ruck or 10 metre infringements from this season instead of a set restart. Outside these 40 metre areas it will be set restarts.

You can steal or strip the ball when more than one defender in a tackle when a player in possession is attempting to ground the ball for a try

If there are two or more defender[s] effecting the tackle and the ball is stolen a penalty should be awarded, except if the player in possession is attempting to ground the ball for a try

So in your example - there can be more than 2 in a tackle if the player in possession is attempting to score and or or ground the ball for a try.

It can be easily fixed as I said above to rid the game of the third man in rubbish and unsavory tackles - i.e cannonball / hipdrop/prowler/chicken wing/grapple/missile/choker etc.

Surely a win win for the game and especially the fans and current and future players and fans.

Nothing worse than to see the game degenerate to a wrestle /judo contest and the league and all clubs are to blame.

It seems the most important person on a clubs staff nowadays is the wrestling/judo coach instead of clubs hiring staff who can really teach players how to tackle and attack and play the game the way it should be.

The product is suffering and has been for years as a result of not only the wrestling/judo nonsense but also with the over structured negative multiple hits ups,out the back with decoys and kick on the last rubbish they call the attack.

May as well have 17 robots out there for each team as the majority play the same way- a few teams have changed it up by moving away from the over structured negative "attack" at least and are moving the ball more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L23Ph2gjpSM

https://wwos.nine.com.au/nrl/nrls-bi...a-840adabb5613

There has never been a rule preventing more than two players to complete a tackle and there never will be. You're just clutching at any straw you can think of now.

[King Salvo]

There has never been a rule preventing more than two players to complete a tackle and there never will be. You're just clutching at any straw you can think of now.

Whatever - the third man in has naught to do with defending the majority of the time and only there to slow the play the ball down via the wrestling/judo rubbish as well inflicting some unsavory tackles on the ball carrier.

Gould was right that it should have nipped in the bud as all it did was to introduce the scourge of the game which is the wrestling/judo rubbish and the over structured multiple hit ups, out the back with the decoys and kick on the last rubbish passed off as the attack.

If you watch games before the above rubbish came in with tackles that did involve three defenders they were all legitimately attempting a tackle and no two defenders holding the ball carrier up whilst a third man in attacked the ball carriers legs etc etc .

In the Collins incident Manu and Whytle held Hastings up -either of them themselves could have put him on the ground. When that occurs the ball carrier being held the refs should call held and release

The attack was also a lot better pre wrestling/judo rubbish with players actually moving the ball from side to side and I dare say offloading as well etc - unstructured footy and a better game to watch than the robotic version of the game we have had since the wrestling/judo rubbish came in.

As those 2 youtube video's I posted show as an example no one likes the wrestling/judo rubbish and or the over structured attack- Sterlo would often say he didn't like the way the game was played and Johns would bang on about the over structured attack and creativity being coached out of players etc etc.

If the NRL wants a better product they have to do more to than just introduce set restarts and or now penalties in the 40 metre zones to rid the game of the wrestling/judo rubbish.- Coaches need to be weaned off this wrestling/judo/structured attack too

I leave you with this - which period of the game you like more as a spectacle -the pre wrestling/judo and third man in/unstructured attack version of the game or the wrestling/judo and third man in /structured attack version of the game.

Mines the pre one.

Nothing wrong with this pre wrestle/judo/ over structured attack game from 1996.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWBUL6aFiQg