Re: rule changes for 2017 : Sun Dec 18, 2016 11:01 pm  

Harry Pinner wrote:

Well they already have to see where 40/20s are kicked from and where kicks cross the touch line so I don't see why not. It doesn't have to be to the inch. Maybe in bands, 40-50 metres out, 50-60 metres out etc. I just think the rules should reward skill not just having a huge boot.

How is having a huge boot not a skill? If you can kick it dead from 50 yards plus, then it probably will bounce, meaning that you have found the turf and beaten the fullback, making it an accurate kick. Mot much difference to kicking it into touch.

Btw, are people really kicking it dead on purpose that often? You called it 'doing a Sinfield' but he kicked dead on purpose, maybe a couple of times in a season, and that was usually to kill time when we were winning in big games.

Im not sure how I feel about the seven tackle rule, it could lead to more accurate kicking, but in all likelihood it will lead to less teams looking for repeat sets and more looking towards a cross field kick or power play. It might make for more entertaining rugby, but won't help when we play any Aussie teams.

Re: rule changes for 2017 : Sun Dec 18, 2016 11:14 pm  

leedsnsouths wrote:

How is having a huge boot not a skill? If you can kick it dead from 50 yards plus, then it probably will bounce, meaning that you have found the turf and beaten the fullback, making it an accurate kick. Mot much difference to kicking it into touch.

Btw, are people really kicking it dead on purpose that often? You called it 'doing a Sinfield' but he kicked dead on purpose, maybe a couple of times in a season, and that was usually to kill time when we were winning in big games.

Im not sure how I feel about the seven tackle rule, it could lead to more accurate kicking, but in all likelihood it will lead to less teams looking for repeat sets and more looking towards a cross field kick or power play. It might make for more entertaining rugby, but won't help when we play any Aussie teams.

I agree with this. I think the whole "kicking it dead" thing has been overblown. Most of the time teams aren't aiming to kick it dead. They'd rather it stayed in play.
As you say for it to go dead it has to find the ground so isn't as "unskilled" as some would suggest and is also easily defensible. The fact that defending teams are happy to let these kicks go dead shows it doesn't have much of a negative impact on that team.

I'd have more sympathy with a rule change in this regard if we had Union-style, huge in-goal areas. As most RL in-goals are very short it's very difficult to get the ball to stay there and doesn't require much of a misjudgement/unlucky bounce for the ball to roll dead.

Re: rule changes for 2017 : Sun Dec 18, 2016 11:40 pm  

Yeah I'm ok with the kicking thing. Maybe if the kick is from your own half and it goes dead then the opposition starts on the 30m instead but if you punish the kicking team too much like the suggestion mention earlier then you won't see an improvement in kicks staying in goal, more a case of conservative kicks that are intended to finish well short of the try line so not to risk it going out and you'll probably see less kicks that stay in goal than you do now.

As for when teams drill it dead purposely, it is usually near the end of the game by a team that's winning and I've always thought it their right to use that tactic as they've gotten themselves in front in the match. The point made above about how short the in goals are here in SL is very important too especially when compared to the ones in the NRL.

Re: rule changes for 2017 : Mon Dec 19, 2016 3:16 am  

Personally I'd look at any rule changes that enable contested possession - stripping should be allowed as should striking at the PTB. One of the reasons the game can get very dour is the emphasis on possession and position. Anything that can shake it up a bit is a good thing IMO.

Re: rule changes for 2017 : Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:50 pm  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

Personally I'd look at any rule changes that enable contested possession - stripping should be allowed as should striking at the PTB. One of the reasons the game can get very dour is the emphasis on possession and position. Anything that can shake it up a bit is a good thing IMO.

Not so sure about striking at the play the ball as I think that could get very messy very quickly, but I'm tempted by the idea of allowing stealing of the ball. Maybe see it trialled in the lower leagues where no more than 2 defenders in the tackle can steal the ball, rather than the current 1.

ruck : Wed Jan 11, 2017 6:50 pm  

Anything been done in the off season to clean up the play the ball and ruck in general. Imo one of the big reasons the game has become such a mess and difficult to watch at times in this country.

Re: ruck : Wed Jan 11, 2017 6:57 pm  

Yes the RFL have decided that big Nige will be dropped from a great height on any untidy ruck!!!

Re: ruck : Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:00 pm  

I wondered if your finger had aimed a bit too high on the first letter entered with that subject header.

If anything has been done WRT policing rules to cleaning up the PTB and ruck areas, SL will be a penaltyathon for the first few rounds until it's all forgotten about and allowed to proceed as normal.

Jamie Peacock has retired now, hence why it's well overdue

Re: ruck : Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:40 pm  

The rucks aren't too bad, it's the passages of play in between that are the problem.

Re: rule changes for 2017 : Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:31 pm  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

Personally I'd look at any rule changes that enable contested possession - stripping should be allowed as should striking at the PTB. One of the reasons the game can get very dour is the emphasis on possession and position. Anything that can shake it up a bit is a good thing IMO.

allowing stripping would remove offloading. Rather than open up the game, i think allowing it would close it up as sides hold the ball as it is being attacked.

I think an issue which has spoiled the game a little is that teams are so fit these days and defenses so organised that teams can afford to give away 2/3/4 penalties and defend their line so we see most breaks or broken defences hold down, and struggling defences look to reef the ball away or knock it out and teams do it many many times in the expectation that the ref will eventually decide that one of them was down to the carrier. This is especially the case towards the end of halves as the try and run the clock out.

Ive often thought we need to introduce a third card, a 5 minute sin bin, to be used to stamp out minor offences and clean the game up. So a 5 minute sin binning for any stripping, slowing the PTB, and head-high challenges, which would give a punishment worse than a penalty but not as effecting on the game as a yellow or red card.

I think putting the onus on the defence to clean up those areas of the game would see a naturally faster ptb breaking the defensive line aswell as fewer penalties. To tip some balance back to the defence we should allow the markers to stand side by side at the ptb to make it easier to defend the scoot.