I can understand the dead ball rule. The ball isn't officially in touch until it has touched either the line or bounced over the line, so it should be no different in the in-goal area.

Spot on.

in some ways the dead ball thing is correct as thats how it works on the sidelines but rls main attraction is the speed its played at and obviously that slows it down other than that it doesnt bother me because i can see the reasoning and you cant say that about the rfl very often.

Can't argue with that, Saints would probably have still won. BUT that doesn't alter how boring a game becomes when one side gets every decision and it becomes a walkover. It's such a shame to see an entertaining, competative 1st half followed by a complete bore-fest. From the people I've spoken to it seems I was in the minority in actually watching the game to its conclusion.

That said, Salford were their own worst enemy at times and it seemed like fatigue was the cause of many of their mistakes while Saints maintained their form - ATEOTD that's the difference between the best and the rest. Still, I persist in (naively) expecting more from our officials and just because Saints were bound to win, doesn't mean they get to hand them points.

case in point: I can just about forgive missing a double head high tackle on a player EXCEPT when it is replayed about 6 times as part of the VR decision!

I thought the ball was in touch if it came into contact with any object--including a player--who was in touch. That was the same for touch and TIG.

And this is how I prefer it personally.

going to make defending kicks a lot more difficult. think we will see a lot of ball being batted back in field by diving hands etc as defenders will likley not be escorting the ball out of play as they need to.

Exactly, which is the way it should be.

It has changed. It caters for the situation where the player passes the ball as the referee calls held.

But that wasn't the case last night. The ball was passed way after the held call. It should have been a penalty to Salford. Saints scored off the next play didn't they?

Didn't watch it, I was just mentioning the new rule. Omid Djalili at Middlesbrough Town Hall took precedence.

Yep. Wilkin under the posts.

I think it's repeated on Sky Sports 1 at 1 pm this afternoon.

The SL's main backer must be WWE

Yep;




The following changes to Law will apply to all RFL games from December 26th, 2011.

Players carry on running or pass the ball after the referee has called “Held”.
Players often struggle to hear the referee call held in an upright tackle. The award of a penalty is often seen as harsh. To allow the team to retain possession and continue with a play the ball the following Law should be amended.

Amendment -Section 11 – Law 6: Verbal instructions to resolve doubt.
If any doubt arises as to a tackle, the Referee should give a verbal instruction to “play on” or shout “held” as the case may be. If the referee is of the opinion that the player in possession could not hear the “held” call before passing or running off with the ball he should instruct the player to play the ball at the point where the player was when “held” was called unless it occurs after the fifth play the ball in which case a handover will apply.