Even so that's interfering with play isn't it Rob?robjoenz posted:
An injured player isn't interfering with play unless the ball goes near him (not his fault). Even then it's not a penalty, but the ball is taken back to the previous play-the-ball.
Well according to the rules if that player is retreating, as long as he's not making an attempt to tackle the player or run into him deliberately it's not interfering. But your reference earlier was to a taker of a kick being well infront of the onside defence and that is facing the right way despite being on the other side of the pitch.The interpretations anger fans only when the decision goes against their team. You can look at a lot of offsides, for example, and make a case for it being given or not being given and the majority of fans will take the reason why it shouldn't go against their side. When in reality the referee will have given it for a very good reason.
You can't say if a player is out of play they are offside. What about your fatty prop making his way back the ten metres doesn't get back quick enough for a quick play-the-ball. Or when a tackling player can't get out of the way fast enough. It wouldn't be fair to penalise that, plus you'd quickly lose the respect of the players.
Of course fans are going to be angry when it's against their team, their gonna be biased and want the best for their team! The referee may give it for it a good reason, but not if it is in direct violation of play. If there is a good reason, why are these not consistent which the vast majority of referees across the board? Also there is no clarity in the variance from them and there is already no up-to-date rule book still from the rfl online and how can fans relate to the ref's decisions, let alone understand them as you want?
Even if there was more clarity, there is still no explanation for the inconsistency of SL ref's.
I am sorry for the lateness of the reply, i have had a funeral, moved my mum to a new house and i'm moving myself today!! I probably won't be able to reply to any reply, but will be happy to continue this discussion when i'm back on the net in about 3 weeks.[/quote]