FORUMS > Bradford Bulls > Robert Hicks |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 28357 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Bullseye "I always wondered when "dropping" the ball at the PTB was suddenly ruled as a knock on. I've only seen black and white footage of that!
I agree that if refs enforces the playing of the ball with the foot and no more rolling it'd be easy to see. However it would advantage the defending team. '"
Don't mind them rolling it, but if they do, then playing with the foot should in that case be compulsory. I think a proper and legal PTB can be done perfectly fast enough to be fair to both sides.
Quote: Bullseye "There needs to be a wholesale clean up of the PTB and I think that 2 refs is the only way to do it now that clubs are so well versed in the dark arts of dominating at the ruck. I think refs need to clamp down on the cynical stuff used by defensive teams like
Agree. All examples though of how nowadays whatever the rule is, coaches and players will find ways to play right up to the boundaries of the rule, to try to gain an advantage. That's what also leads some to have an impression of inconsistency. For example, a player delays the tackle by the manner and speed of getting off. There will come a particular millisecond when the ref has had enough and blows for a pen.
The next set, an opposition player does just the same, but manages to break contact just as that millisecond was about to lead to a pen.
For all intents and purposes, the incidents were identical, yet one is a pen, and one isn't. To a fan of the team being penalised, it looks unfair. Add to the mix that a ref does not time any tackle, in milliseconds or at all; and will vary his informal timing depending on the circumstances even within one match, and you can see it becomes impossible to achieve consistency. Put another way, you can't say that any fan griping at such an individual call doesn't have a case.
Of course, in all tackles are different, and in some, it's possible to get up and off extremely quickly, where in others, the number and angles and tangling up of defenders may genuinely result in a lengthy PTB. So imposing an arbitrary accurate time limit doesn't work.
But if you ignore the time taken, and instead look at the actions of the player subjectively - i.e. however long it took, did he just complete his tackle, and then get off, or has he delayed it, when he could have avoided delaying it?
That would be the ideal rule. Maybe it is the rule, who knows. But that would mean some tackles would be penalised after a very short dleay, and others would have a very long delay, yet not be penalised at all. Which is I think probably where we are today, so maybe the refs are told currently to judge the tackle on its merits, not on the clock. As I say, who knows? They never tell us.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 10969 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2023 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| I have to say, this idea of rules being changed on the field but not in the rule book is nothing new. For ooooh, I'll bet for 20 years after the lawmakers decided to allow throwing the ball into the second row, the laws of the game said that, "the ball must be thrown down the centre of the tunnel"...and yes, I have noticed they now throw it to the loose forward..
Year after year they, yes it's always [ithey[/i, come up with, so called new 'interpretations', which are really changes in the laws of the game. A move from, "the ball must be placed or dropped", to "dropping the ball is a knock on", is not a change in 'interpretation', it is a change in the laws of the game and surely anyone who can read can see that.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1149 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2012 | 13 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2019 | Nov 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Bulliac "I have to say, this idea of rules being changed on the field but not in the rule book is nothing new. For ooooh, I'll bet for 20 years after the lawmakers decided to allow throwing the ball into the second row, the laws of the game said that, "the ball must be thrown down the centre of the tunnel"...and yes, I have noticed they now throw it to the loose forward..
Year after year they, yes it's always [ithey[/i, come up with, so called new 'interpretations', which are really changes in the laws of the game. A move from, "the ball must be placed or dropped", to "dropping the ball is a knock on", is not a change in 'interpretation', it is a change in the laws of the game and surely anyone who can read can see that.'"
Well you could always award a bonus point for winning a scrum against the head!
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 28357 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| While we are dissecting rules (always a fine pastime) what about this scenarioSpeed essential
11. The play-the-ball must be performed as quickly as possible. Any player who intentionally delays the bringing of the ball into play shall be penalised.'"
Note "may" be penalised. But "shall" be penalised.
Now, I entirely understand WHy Player B is doing this, but because it is very specifically against a clear rule, it has to be penalised. And yet never in my life have I seen such a penalty awarded. Has anyone else? It would be great if they suddenly decided to enforce that rule. Jamie Peacock beware!
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 31959 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| Nope I haven't FA.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 10969 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2023 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| Nor do I think we ever will.
And, much as I'm sure we're as guilty as any other team, neither does it make it right.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 28357 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| And, (he said in the hope of giving birth to another legendary thread) this is of course exactly the offence Mr. Joynt should have been penalised for, not the fabled but mythical voluntary tackle.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 749 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2012 | 12 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Oct 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| So he's now reffed us in 10 games this year. Today he showed all his regular traits, well documented in this thread. As usual some of his decisions were completely baffling-- not only to me and the fans around me but also to the players of both sides.
A new one for me was when he waved his arm in the air seeming to signal another set of 6 and promptly raised that same arm on the very next play signalling last tackle.
He wasn't the reason we lost but he may represent a reason why people turn away from the game.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 632 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jul 2023 | Jul 2023 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Bullnorthern "A new one for me was when he waved his arm in the air seeming to signal another set of 6 and promptly raised that same arm on the very next play signalling last tackle.'"
I'm not 100% certain, but I think on that occasion he had stopped play VERY briefly and was waving time on. Might be getting confused with a different point in the match though.
That said, two other strange decisions (both of which benefited us) was that bit of play where we had knocked on, Widnes lumped it down field thinking it was a free play, we collected it behind goal and played on when he should have taken it back for a Widnes scrum. Also when Widnes were nearly in for a try with about 15 mins in, but Luke Gale tackled the Widnes man without the ball - should have been a sinbin all day long as Widnes would have been in.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 28357 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Hicks did ok, he wasn't conspicuous and let the game flow. What I noticed was that as the game wore on and the crowd saw we were struggling and clueless, that was when they started blaming the ref for everything, but it wasn't him. Had a good view of the second incident, Gale had to assume the player would catch the ball, so had to make contact, he did then continue it when maybe he knew the ball was loose, but it wasn't that clear cut a pen to me. Agree the 'play on' looked wrong, unless he saw something I didn't.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 508 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Sep 2006 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2022 | Dec 2021 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Ferocious Aardvark "Hicks did ok, he wasn't conspicuous and let the game flow. What I noticed was that as the game wore on and the crowd saw we were struggling and clueless, that was when they started blaming the ref for everything, but it wasn't him. Had a good view of the second incident, Gale had to assume the player would catch the ball, so had to make contact, he did then continue it when maybe he knew the ball was loose, but it wasn't that clear cut a pen to me. Agree the 'play on' looked wrong, unless he saw something I didn't.'"
Blatant pen;Hicks bottled it; but you will insist you are correct FA. As always.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 31959 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| As far as mistakes were concerned apart from the odd “free play” incident that went in our favour I didn’t see anything that bad. The laying on at the PTB and the lack of anything like 10m at times was still as infuriating and led to a poor spectacle.
Mind you with a quicker PTB and decent 10 we’d probably have been thrashed!
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 10969 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2023 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| I remember him waving six to go and then the turnover on the next tackle, what made it seem logical was that the ball had been bouncing around loose just before, though, to be honest, I didn't see a Widnes player touch the ball but I thought Hicks must have done. Hicks' signals are ropey at the best of times though and I agree with Bullseye about the laying on and 'shallow' ten. Apparently, according to friends who see more than I do [at present!], refereeing in the championship is not as good as in SL..
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 28357 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: tackler thommo "Blatant pen;Hicks bottled it; but you will insist you are correct FA. As always.
I see the wink, but it wasn't blatant, and none of the match officials called it as a blatant penalty (TJs are supposed to call blatant foul play that the ref has missed).
Hicks didn't "bottle it". On what basis was it a "bottling"? We lost, so it would be an odd person who accused the ref of giving us an advantage by bottling away calls.
How about this as a suggestion - Hicks saw what happened and gave us the benefit of the doubt? I realise that's too non-conspiratorial for some!
And, of course. you're right: I'm right!
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 17146 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Ferocious Aardvark "What I noticed was that as the game wore on and the crowd saw we were struggling and clueless, that was when they started blaming the ref for everything,'"
................Pope is Catholic, bears poo in the woods.
|
|
|
|
|
|