2018 Brisbane Broncos Thread

Dip wrote:

Broncos had the ball when the play started, kicked it and no Rabbitoh touched it. Of course we're the attacking team. A team that throws a loose pass is still the attacking team until the other team takes possession of it. I have no idea what you mean by the second point or it's relevance. I totally disagree with the third point as Oates, the attacking player, played at the ball and hit it with his hand not his foot, so no way can it still be termed a kick after that.

whether you are chasing a loose pass (which I guess is what a batback is), or chasing a kick you still cant take someone out before they get the ball. Especially if they are chasing the ball in an attempt to score a try. If its a dropout, surely there is no attacking team until someone has control of the ball ??

Duno hey, he still should have been penalised lol

I refute that you are the attacking team when forced to take a drop out that must go 10 metres. It's like saying at the kick off, the team kicking is the attacking team. It's just not true, even if they can end up with possession. Nobody has ever said at the start of a game "right, the Bunnies will take the kick off and be on the attack until the Roosters take possession."

It's a silly argument.

No way on gods green earth was it a penalty try and I can deal with the no sin bin, but to say there was no interference is silly stuff. He clearly shifted his line and deliberately took the player out, even though he didn't need to.

Ice wrote:I refute that you are the attacking team when forced to take a drop out that must go 10 metres.

"Attacking team" refers to the team in positive territory, not the team with the ball, so you are correct.

Ice wrote:I refute that you are the attacking team when forced to take a drop out that must go 10 metres. It's like saying at the kick off,  the team kicking is the attacking team. It's just not true, even if they can end up with possession. Nobody has ever said at the start of a game "right, the Bunnies will take the kick off and be on the attack until the Roosters take possession."

It's a silly argument.

No way on gods green earth was it a penalty try and I can deal with the no sin bin, but to say there was no interference is silly stuff. He clearly shifted his line and deliberately took the player out, even though he didn't need to.

what are kickoffs and dropouts classed as? Turnovers? starts of play? ... you definitely aren't an attacking side if you literally have to kick the ball away and its not already in play. Yep spot on Ice

Pieman wrote:Wouldnt you have to have control of the ball to become the attacking team?

Dip wrote:Broncos had the ball when the play started, kicked it and no Rabbitoh touched it. Of course we're the attacking team.

No and no. Rabbits were the attacking team in this instance, regardless of who had control of the ball. You can't be the attacking team kicking it off your own line.

That's interesting? Anyone got the actual rules as to what constitutes an attacking team? Possession? Field position?

Lifted from the rugby league glossary of terms:
Attacking Team is the team, which at the time has a territorial advantage. If a scrum is to be formed on the halfway line the team which last touched the ball before it went out of play is the attacking team.

yeah its an interesting one for sure

Surely a team can be attacking even when they aren't in "positive territory". How can you have possession of a ball and not be the attacking side lol eg coming out of your own end.

Pieman wrote:yeah its an interesting one for sure

The problem is that it is irrelevant to the original discussion and was only mentioned briefly by Dip in the context of Sims correctly not being penalised.

Pieman wrote:Surely a team can be attacking even when they aren't in "positive territory". How can you have possession of a ball and not be the attacking side lol eg coming out of your own end.

Might seem weird from a commentary perspective but essentially it is because it doesn't relate to that many rules and because the definition works for the rules it relates to.

Pieman wrote:Surely a team can be attacking even when they aren't in "positive territory". How can you have possession of a ball and not be the attacking side lol eg coming out of your own end.

How can you be the attacking side when you are 80m from scoring and the other guys are only 20?

If you don't have possession but are literally tackling the other side on their 20, sorry, but you are the defending team. You aren't just 20m from scoring, you are 20m AND possession. And it's impossible to score without taking possession.

My take on it is possession. You can't score without the ball

Fuck me, there's not much I love more then Rugby League, but we are a weird fucking sport sometimes! That official definition of an attacking team is crazy

SI wrote:Fuck me, there's not much I love more then Rugby League, but we are a weird fucking sport sometimes!  That official definition of an attacking team is crazy

As I mentioned above SI, it's a terminology thing and only creates confusion because we already talk about 'attacking teams' in terms of a team that has the ball and is therefore....attacking.

Whereas in the context of the NRL rules it's used to differentiate between the ends of the field in certain scenarios e.g. if you kick the ball dead, it is a different outcome depending on whether you are the defending team (your in goal area) or the attacking team (their in goal area).

Really they could/should have just come up with a different name.

Ice wrote:If you don't have possession but are literally tackling the other side on their 20, sorry, but you are the defending team. You aren't just 20m from scoring, you are 20m AND possession. And it's impossible to score without taking possession.

If only there was something in the rules that defined this...

Oz Sport Mad wrote:
Whereas in the context of the NRL rules it's used to differentiate between the ends of the field in certain scenarios e.g. if you kick the ball dead, it is a different outcome depending on whether you are the defending team (your in goal area) or the attacking team (their in goal area).

And also double movements are different end to end, who gets the ball when streakers get in the way... it has quite a few effects.

It also brings about awkward rules, such as in the drop out situation last weekend, where Rabbits are the attacking team but can't be tackled in the air as they are also the non-kicking team.

Sorry, I don't care what the rules say, I understand the rule might be there for various "situations" but all I'm saying is, if you are in possession, you are the attacking team. And that is true of any sport in the world.