I reckon I have seen well over a thousand games. Never in all that time I have bothered to find out who the ref is, often I would be hard pressed to remember who the ref was after the game. It is so ludicrous as to be hilarious that someone who miss a game for such a reason.

I agree, though it didn't stop me cheering the decision. It would have been fair to make him move back & play from the mark. It doesn't necessarily give the attack an advantage being closer to the defensive line.

No but it does give them an advantage to make the markers move one way to avoid being not square.



I can see why Silverwood gave it, it's one of the more blatant examples of moving off the mark, I wish the refs would penalise more of them.

If players are consistently moving forward into the markers then refs should penalise it more.

Certain players are renowned for it ( to me at least) Shenton of Cas being one.

What I'd like to see at the start of games is offences being penalised in less critical areas of the field & treat both sides the same.

Far too often in my judgement offences are overlooked then the same offence is penalised in a critical area i.e. close to the opponents line when it has potentially a much greater impact on the outcome of a game.

Arguably Manfredi's offence falls into that category.

Moving off the ball happens in at least 50% of all PTB if the marker stands steady it can't happen - as the defending team you need to ensure your first maker is in tight enough to stop the attackers moving forward

But that gives you a less favourable angle if the dummy half scoots.



If you take a pace or two back, you give yourself more chance of making the tackle on a dummy half run, and a better view of what's going on behind the ruck in terms of runners coming on the inside ball or drop off.



I'd say a large percentage of cases of "moving off the mark" come about because the ball carrier has won the collision and has to get over/round the bodies of the defenders so he can play the ball. It's a bit harsh to start penalising them for it.

Isn't the second man there to assist in that area - surely giving the attackers more room is counter productive, isn't the point about line speed to cramp their space? Surely at elite levels it shouldn't be so rigid that one marker goes one way and the other the other? Both markers should be alert to what is happening it isn't as if the markers can't see the first receiver.

He is, but if you're locked in at marker there's no advantage to be right in the face of the player playing the ball. You've got nowhere to go other than sideways.



If you both take a step backwards, then your first pace can be forward and you can meet the ball carrier head on rather than side on if they run close to the play the ball.



Having your markers split sides is just covering the bases. It stops both of them over-chasing the play and leaving a massive gap in behind the play the ball, Like having players on the posts at a corner in football.

In which event penalise the tacklers for not moving away quickly enough.

Plus make sure that the play the ball is exactly that i.e. the tackled player must propel the ball backwards with his foot. They do that in the NRL.

Then the ref &/or the linesmen can see exactly if the defence is onside when the ball is played.

I thought the same at the time

You're asking the tackled player to take a risk though. Does he put the ball down amidst the bodies, try to play it and hope the referee gives the penalty, or does he just step to one side or forward a pace to get a clean play the ball and allow his dummy half to get out with the markers still out of position?

I am not sure what you were watching with that particular play the ball. He didn't just take a yard. He crawled forward first to create the situation where a Leeds player is behind, then he stepped further forward when he got to his feet. It was clear cheating from the player in question to gain an advantage. Rightly penalised.