Six again

[Alan79]

I know a lot of people like this new ruling in the game due to the fact that there aren't extended delays. But to me it's often leaving me questioning why in God's name was a penalty given.

I'll make no secret of the fact that for a number of years I've thought referees decided games in line with the most profitable results possible for their gambling sponsor. Part of that sponsorship deal includes percentage of profits garnered from NRL gambling. So they have an interest in taking money off gamblers.

The big issue in recent years has been that people have increasingly noticed that situations occurred when people wonder how was one incident worthy of a penalty, but another was not. It's driven numerous people away from watching the game. Having seen numerous contentious calls decide origin matches, I haven't wRched an origin game pretty much since the gambling sponsors got their hooks into the game.

Now if I were prone to suspicion I'd be making the allegation that this new rule where teams are given a quick tap for six more tackles is a pretty crafty way of allowing refs to influence the games, while also avoiding the replays that have made fans ask how was that a penalty.

I seriously don't know what half the penalties given out are for anymore.

Anyone else feeling like this or is it just me?

 

[Chrisaaar]

I hate the new rule. It's just a faster way to sway momentum.

The rules didn't have to change, the refs did. If they policed the wrestle from day one they wouldn't have had to make these stupid changes in the first place.

 

[khan]

Now that you put it that way..

I tend to just go with the flow and naturally thats whats been happening, the game is flowing, you raise a good point.

 

[TABOO]

Of course it is.
You only have to look at the way it is 'policed' during the game.
They give them out inconsistently and for far less severe infringements that they did even it was a penalty.
Even commentators are saying that it wouldn't have been a penalty so why is it a set restart?

 

[Scoooby]

The rule is ridiculous, but again if it’s in our favour it’s good lol..! In the fence but still don’t like it.

 

[Freakzilla]

I love it. League is the best it's been to watch for about 15 years.

 

[foREVerA7X]

I'm all for these tin foil hate conspiracy theories and from the outside looking in, you can see how it has the possibility to make sense (especially the nepotism in the Sutton Clan).

I'm with you on Gambling being a major sponsor of the NRL and any sport to be fair. The world wiped out teams/sports/individuals being sponsored by major cigarette companies so why can't they do the same for Gambling?

 

[dogluva]

It makes the penalty counts look good and gives the impression that things are pretty even but the six again is instead of where a penalty would be awarded. Funny thing is, in seasons gone by, the penalty counts would have been astronomical if they had applied the rules as they were meant and as they do now with the restart of count.

Sides are "infringing" more because most are given on the first or second tackle, meaning the side in possession does not get a bigger advantage as they would with a penalty and a kick for touch with more ground gained. It makes the game faster, but it would be interesting to see how many players have been binned for two or three restarts of count in a row.

 

[Northern Beaches dog]

It is very inconsistent and very subjective.
Just another tool for referees to use so they can manipulate the result.
It has also resulted in alot more blowouts.
The league will regret it

 

[Psycho Doggie]

For me it seems to depend on the ref. I try and call the 6 agains in any game I watch, and some games I'm calling it more than half the time, other times zero, the refs decisions are a complete mystery. I suspect that a ref who is focused on knowing the rules and calling the rules does a better job, whereas the refs who's 6 again calls are a mystery are the refs whose style is to do "homework" on the teams they are reffing, with the result they go into games expecting to see certain players doing the wrong thing, and because they expect to see it, they see it, even if it doesn't happen.

 

[The DoggFather]

I hate it.

Another tool to manipulate games for betting.

 

[maroondog72]

I love it ,brings genuine halves back into the game through fatigue and the ruck isn’t just a wrestling match also put a lot of emphasis on having a running DH.its not perfect but it’s better than the shit we’ve been watching for the last 10-15 years for mine

 

[maroondog72]

Interesting stat from a couple of weeks ago we where joint leaders in the league with the broncs for six again received with 28 both teams just did nothing with them.

 

[steeliz]

In theory with competant referees it is a great tool to keep games flowing.

In the hands of corrupt or incompetent refs it is a way of handing advantage to their preferred side without having to explain themselves.

Not that I am mentioning the Sutton Bros. or Ashley Kline in any way.

 

[Kelpie03]

I know a lot of people like this new ruling in the game due to the fact that there aren't extended delays. But to me it's often leaving me questioning why in God's name was a penalty given.

I'll make no secret of the fact that for a number of years I've thought referees decided games in line with the most profitable results possible for their gambling sponsor. Part of that sponsorship deal includes percentage of profits garnered from NRL gambling. So they have an interest in taking money off gamblers.

The big issue in recent years has been that people have increasingly noticed that situations occurred when people wonder how was one incident worthy of a penalty, but another was not. It's driven numerous people away from watching the game. Having seen numerous contentious calls decide origin matches, I haven't wRched an origin game pretty much since the gambling sponsors got their hooks into the game.

Now if I were prone to suspicion I'd be making the allegation that this new rule where teams are given a quick tap for six more tackles is a pretty crafty way of allowing refs to influence the games, while also avoiding the replays that have made fans ask how was that a penalty.

I seriously don't know what half the penalties given out are for anymore.

Anyone else feeling like this or is it just me?

Very good post, the 6 again rule will certainly make it easier for the referees to influence the games.

 

[GA45]

I know a lot of people like this new ruling in the game due to the fact that there aren't extended delays. But to me it's often leaving me questioning why in God's name was a penalty given.

I'll make no secret of the fact that for a number of years I've thought referees decided games in line with the most profitable results possible for their gambling sponsor. Part of that sponsorship deal includes percentage of profits garnered from NRL gambling. So they have an interest in taking money off gamblers.

The big issue in recent years has been that people have increasingly noticed that situations occurred when people wonder how was one incident worthy of a penalty, but another was not. It's driven numerous people away from watching the game. Having seen numerous contentious calls decide origin matches, I haven't wRched an origin game pretty much since the gambling sponsors got their hooks into the game.

Now if I were prone to suspicion I'd be making the allegation that this new rule where teams are given a quick tap for six more tackles is a pretty crafty way of allowing refs to influence the games, while also avoiding the replays that have made fans ask how was that a penalty.

I seriously don't know what half the penalties given out are for anymore.

Anyone else feeling like this or is it just me?

I liked the rule when it first came in but I didn’t factor in the refs ability to interpret it. So yeah it’s making the games normally to one sided and it’s hard for the team getting an arse kicking to change the momentum.

 

[Lov_Dog]

Hi folks, been thinking about comments regarding not knowing or being informed what the 6 again/set restart was for.
So, I always listen with airpods in, rather than with the speakers on, and I hear 80-90% of the calls.
Thinking about this over the weekend, I tried to pay attention during a set restart - the commentators volume is much louder than the referee's mic volume. I would suggest trying the ear phones if you want to hear the set restarts.

 

[Mack]

There's still room for improvement but for mind its making the game the best its been for a number of years. I think the game is finally headed in the right direction. Defs a fan of it.

 

[Heckler]

The only saving grace about this 6 again stuff is that there is no stop in play and it doesn't give you a touch finder which is obviously more advantage from a penalty.

Worst part about it is no clarity as to when it is given and who gives it. Is it from upstairs.

To many ifs for my liking.

 

[DT]

I know a lot of people like this new ruling in the game due to the fact that there aren't extended delays. But to me it's often leaving me questioning why in God's name was a penalty given.

I'll make no secret of the fact that for a number of years I've thought referees decided games in line with the most profitable results possible for their gambling sponsor. Part of that sponsorship deal includes percentage of profits garnered from NRL gambling. So they have an interest in taking money off gamblers.

The big issue in recent years has been that people have increasingly noticed that situations occurred when people wonder how was one incident worthy of a penalty, but another was not. It's driven numerous people away from watching the game. Having seen numerous contentious calls decide origin matches, I haven't wRched an origin game pretty much since the gambling sponsors got their hooks into the game.

Now if I were prone to suspicion I'd be making the allegation that this new rule where teams are given a quick tap for six more tackles is a pretty crafty way of allowing refs to influence the games, while also avoiding the replays that have made fans ask how was that a penalty.

I seriously don't know what half the penalties given out are for anymore.

Anyone else feeling like this or is it just me?

Agree 100%. Yes it makes the game faster but it pretty much guarantees you dominate for at least 10 minutes...i personally don't like it at all especially because we are hopeless around the ruck & we usually don't get calls anyway.
Would be interesting to see the overall results so far since its introduction...which teams get the most, how many score after a repeat set, do they retain possessIon for the next 5-10 minutes etc etc