NRL has stirred up some controversy with a mid-season change to the obstruction rule, and the timing couldn’t be worse for the Penrith Panthers. The Storm’s win over the Panthers was marked by a contentious first try that many feel should have been ruled as obstruction.
The rule in question involves the conduct of decoy runners and their interaction with defenders. Traditionally, the NRL has maintained that decoy runners who make contact with a defender’s outside shoulder should be penalized for obstruction, regardless of the impact on the play. This is the standard that was applied in previous seasons and led to some strict rulings, such as denying the Roosters a try earlier this year due to contact well behind the play.
However, recent games have seen this standard seemingly disregarded. In the Panthers’ recent clash against the Eels, a similar situation was overlooked, and now the Storm’s first try against the Panthers has raised eyebrows. Jack Howarth’s contact with Nathan Cleary appears to contradict the established interpretation of the rule, leaving many to question if there’s been an unofficial change in how these situations are adjudicated.
Cooper Cronk’s comments highlight the confusion surrounding the rule’s application. His analysis suggests that while Cleary was impeded, it’s uncertain whether that contact should have been deemed sufficient to influence the play as the rulebook would traditionally dictate.
With finals approaching, this inconsistency in officiating could have significant implications, both for the teams involved and for the integrity of the competition. Fans and experts alike are left wondering if a clear and consistent interpretation of the rule will be established before the postseason.
Leave a Reply