cpwigan posted:
The Webb incident? You accept I take it Rob that Webb never touched the Saints player playing the ball? Therefore how can he be interfering bar making fresh air move?
No, he didn't make contact. There was intent to though. You can penalise intent. As you know players will try anything and if they get away with it they'll try it again. He didn't try it again did he.
Where you then contradict yourself is by saying a playing breaking the rule re not being inside the 10 between marker and the defence line is not interfering with play EVEN though he often physically blocks the dummy half running.
It's about intent... a player has the right to occupy a space on the field, the dummy half has the right to run around the retreating player, they nearly always run straight at his back though, their right. The defending team has a man less in the line, why not run for that gap?
Why not move sideways? Why do offside players no longer raise their arms in time honoured fashion.
If they moved sideways so would the dummy runner, back to square one.
Why run with hands in the air... token gesture with little to no meaning.
Again last night. It may have been technically that Wigan for the first try broke the rule by having players in the 10. No penalty IYO because as you would say he is not interfering with play.
That confuses me that... I was always off the opinion that once within the ten on a kick you were pressuring the receiver and hence offside, CF - Wakefield -v- Warrington. Going to ask about that one.
So if we take your stance, if a team stands offside on the open from a scrum BUT the opposition go blind it should be play on. If a team breaks from the scrum early and covers moves in and around the scrum base bu the team with the ball flings the ball wide it should be play on. I hope you can see how by being liberal and creating grey areas brings the rules into conflict because referees start to arbitarily contradict their intended purpose.
Why penalise if you don't have to? No interferene then why stop the game?
Do you want more penalties in the game? I don't.
If attacker X looks up and sees his left side has an overlap BUT he also sees 2 defenders blatantly offside so he cannot see a way of exploiting that attacking opportunity and ends up going right where the defence is stacked BUT onside can you not see that even though the team with ball did not go left they were denied an attacking opportunity.
If they were trying to get one over on the referee like you keep saying then surely they'd run for the offside players to get a penalty? The dummy half runs for the retreating player expecting a penalty, surely they'd go for players when they actually were offside.
IT is the referees job to enforce the rules and minimise how much gamesmanship is allowed. Under pressure in high profile matches that pressure is 100 fold.
50-60 penalties a game then? If you went black and white that's what you'd get. You'd be the first to complain about a referee spoiling the game's flow.
