Tackling to touch, or rather no being allowed to..What a bloody stupid new rule it is. I don't mind having a rule for dragging a player who is already on the deck in to touch, or even carrying someone with both feet off the deck in to touch.. but to not be allowed to gang tackle a player and simply push him towards touch is just daft IMO.
Tonight Catalan did it and were penalised. The ref shouted held for no reason what so ever imo. Cats had the Leeds man trapped and 3 defenders shunted him in touch. No problems with the play from what i could see yet penalty given. Its just good defence so why are we penalising it? I'm pretty sure from hearing the commentary that the same happened to Hull against Wire today.

Also, why has the rules slackened mightily with regards to grounding the ball for a try. Some try's this year have been bordering on American football touch downs.. If a player loses the ball over the line, whether he gets downward pressure afterwards or not, its a bloody knock on - I hate all this fingertip control shenanigans.. there's a big difference between stamping the ball down with your fingers and it dropping and you just then laying a finger on it.

Anyone else agree or am I on my own here?

Agree on the try point. SL Show the other day showed some ropey grounding.

Disagree about the tackling into touch . If player is arrested in an upright position and has no control over where the tacklers are taking him then the tackle should stop there . If momentum of the tackle takes him into touch then I am ok with that .
Touching the ball down with the forearm aint having control of the ball , neither is fingertips . Should sort it once and for all . Make it so they have at least something like a grip on the ball .Maybe so that they could possibly be capable of raising the ball in at least one hand after scoring , or at least have the palm of their hand applying the downward pressure . Either that or make it so you just have to cross the line and not ground it at all .

Don't agree on the touch thing. At the end of the day, I see it as dumb attack if a player goes to the byline and ends up down a rabbit hole, only to meet 3/4 defenders who then are able to dump the player in to touch.

Agree on the grounding. Should be full control over the ball. Forearm is just a joke because there is no control what so ever over the ball. Any gap between hand and ball which is then caught up purely because the ball has hit the deck is not a try for mine but seems OK nowadays. The Hull KR try at Cas was a disgrace - Liam Watts was it?

Catalans got two against us today that I wouldn't have given even if we had 'scored' them . There was also a penalty awarded in our favour for pushing/carrying out .
None of those events have swayed my opinion on the above subjects .
The touch thing appears to be sorted . Just need the touchdowns and the scrums sorting now .
And maybe points deducted from a team if their own fans boo them It should discourage such appalling behaviour .

The tries given yesterday were entirely correct as per the rules of the game. At no point do the rules state that the player has to have control but they do state downward pressure. The replays clearly show that for the first try at no point did the player lose contact with the ball. For a knock-on to have been given the ball has to leave contact with the player and hit either another player and/or the ground. As for the second try the ball was stripped 2 on 1 and as per the rules as of last year a penalty try could not be awarded but as the Cats player grounded the ball after the strip then the greater advantage was to award the try rather than the penalty. Correct as per the rules of the game.

As for the penalty awarded for taking the player into touch, it wasn't for the dragging into touch but because as per the interpretations this year where an upright tackle occurs, if the player in possesion has a leg lifted off the ground then the referee calls held which in this case he clearly did twice hence the penalty.

Nothing has changed with regards attacking players lending weight but laying a hand on is not enough they have ato lend weight and make a difference.

Quote: ladyref "The tries given yesterday were entirely correct as per the rules of the game. At no point do the rules state that the player has to have control but they do state downward pressure. The replays clearly show that for the first try at no point did the player lose contact with the ball. For a knock-on to have been given the ball has to leave contact with the player and hit either another player and/or the ground. As for the second try the ball was stripped 2 on 1 and as per the rules as of last year a penalty try could not be awarded but as the Cats player grounded the ball after the strip then the greater advantage was to award the try rather than the penalty. Correct as per the rules of the game. As for the penalty awarded for taking the player into touch, it wasn't for the dragging into touch but because as per the interpretations this year where an upright tackle occurs, if the player in possesion has a leg lifted off the ground then the referee calls held which in this case he clearly did twice hence the penalty. Nothing has changed with regards attacking players lending weight but laying a hand on is not enough they have ato lend weight and make a difference.'" Thanks for clearing that up however I wasn't really angeling that the trys were given against the rules of the game, simply that the rules are too lax with regards to grounding the ball. 'Downward pressure' is vague and there is too much of a grey area. Can you tell me why the try was given in the Cas v Hull KR game? (Not having a go, am genuinely interested) - see www.superleague.co.uk/video/player.php?id=545 (10:20) Re interpretation and upright tackle.. did the catalan players either stop the momentum, or lift the Leeds player? I didn't see that if that's the case. I think the refs are confused also, because I haven't seen any consistency with regards to this. All I know is it is frustrating to watch, and must be even more frustrating to play with - which is really what I was getting at.

Quote: ladyref "The tries given yesterday were entirely correct as per the rules of the game. At no point do the rules state that the player has to have control but they do state downward pressure. The replays clearly show that for the first try at no point did the player lose contact with the ball. For a knock-on to have been given the ball has to leave contact with the player and hit either another player and/or the ground. As for the second try the ball was stripped 2 on 1 and as per the rules as of last year a penalty try could not be awarded but as the Cats player grounded the ball after the strip then the greater advantage was to award the try rather than the penalty. Correct as per the rules of the game. As for the penalty awarded for taking the player into touch, it wasn't for the dragging into touch but because as per the interpretations this year where an upright tackle occurs, if the player in possesion has a leg lifted off the ground then the referee calls held which in this case he clearly did twice hence the penalty. Nothing has changed with regards attacking players lending weight but laying a hand on is not enough they have ato lend weight and make a difference.'" Thanks for clearing that up however I wasn't really angeling that the trys were given against the rules of the game, simply that the rules are too lax with regards to grounding the ball. 'Downward pressure' is vague and there is too much of a grey area. Can you tell me why the try was given in the Cas v Hull KR game? (Not having a go, am genuinely interested) - see www.superleague.co.uk/video/player.php?id=545 (10:20) Re interpretation and upright tackle.. did the catalan players either stop the momentum, or lift the Leeds player? I didn't see that if that's the case. I think the refs are confused also, because I haven't seen any consistency with regards to this. All I know is it is frustrating to watch, and must be even more frustrating to play with - which is really what I was getting at.

Would it not be better if instead of a penalty for pushing a player in to touch after the referee shouts held, instead the attacking player simply played the ball from where he was when the referee shouted held?
At the moment referees are calling held when the defence is in full motion pushing the player and cannot stop instantly meaning a penalty is unavoidable, particularly as they probably can't hear the referee calling given their proximity to the touchline and the crowd. A penalty in these circumstances is harsh and unwarranted.

I think a lot o fplayers would be confused if they had to play the ball at the spot held was called, they usually like to walk forward/sideways a few steps first
but a similar thing happened yesterday where the catalan player was called held and proceeded to drive over the line and out the ball down, play was yaken back to the place where held was called, should it have been penalty defence?

OK, so what happens if the ball is lying in the in-goal area? Are you suggesting the player has to pick it up before grounding it again? The ball is nevr in the control of the player in this case. Yes, some of the tries given are arguable either way but changing a fundamental law of the game ain't going to solve that one.

The rules state for a try to be scored downward pressure has to be applied by the hand arm or torso and have been so for at least the last 20 years

If the ball is lying in the in-goal area it should be 'properly' grounded with control . Palm of the hand on the ball (control and downward pressure)is sufficient in my opinion , no need to pick it up first .
One example could be Sinfield yesterday .
If he had touched it with one fingertip it would be classed as downward pressure, but with no control whatsoever .
The Catalans player had considerably more downward pressure and control over the ball .
I'd award that try even if Sinfield had brushed his fingers on the top of the ball first .
Did it go to VR to see if Sinfield actually grounded it ?

Seen a few VR decisions for tries where the attacking player has been stopped just short of the line and stretched out an arm in an attempt to get the ball over . Player loses control of the ball , but has fingertips on it (sometimes on the side of the ball) as it touches the floor . Try given . Not in my book .

Maybe not in your book but certainly in the rule book which is the thing we all go by.