Change to Stripping Rule

[Walt Flanigan]

NRL to change stripping rule in tackles

The NRL has informed clubs of a rule change for the 2018 Telstra Premiership, making alterations to the one-on-one strip.

At Tuesday’s chief executive conference at Rugby League Central, the clubs were informed of the alteration that could have an impact on defensive strategies heading into the new season.

Previously players were penalised for stripping the ball in a one-on-one situation if another defender had made any contact in the tackle leading up to the ball being raked.

However, under the new rule, the players can strip the ball in a one-on-one situation regardless of previous contact made by teammates.

This moves comes after the NRL previously announced a crackdown on incorrect play the balls.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/02/16...utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=NetworkContent

 

[T-Boon]

I like it, though it does not go far enough.
An attempted strip should never be 6 again when recovered by the attacking team or a knock on against the defender even if it is propelled forward by the defender in the striping action.

 

[kbw]

I like it, though it does not go far enough.
An attempted strip should never be 6 again when recovered by the attacking team or a knock on against the defender even if it is propelled forward by the defender in the striping action.

I agree that it is a good decision but I can't agree with your other bit. A strip where the player originally with the ball loses the ball it def should be 6 again. The defender has played at it

 

[T-Boon]

I A strip where the player originally with the ball loses the ball it def should be 6 again. The defender has played at it

I agree that obviously the defender has played at the ball.
I also acknowledge the overriding rule as it currently exists is simple...if you play at the ball in any circumstances and the opposition recovers it then it is a fresh set of 6 tackles. I just believe there should be exceptions to that.
My thinking is the same as the charge down rule being an exception to the knock on rule. A charge down should be deemed a knock on except they decided to make it an exception to the rule (which I think must have come into existence as recognition for the fact it is an awesome effort play by the defender).
So basically in my way of thinking with the strip is, if you want to encourage the ball carrier to control the ball and you want to encourage some competition for the ball and you want to reward one on one tackles then make the strip an exception to the tackle count restart rule.
If the attacking team recovers it they still keep the ball for the reminder of the set of possession. They just shouldn't get the benefit of a new set of tackles since the ball carrier basically lost a one on one battle.

 

[kbw]

Thats an interesting point. we def do not want to reward the ball carrier for poor control

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Free tackle, then?

 

[muzby]

NRL to change stripping rule

Touching is allowed now?

 

[Raiderdave]

I like it, though it does not go far enough.
An attempted strip should never be 6 again when recovered by the attacking team or a knock on against the defender even if it is propelled forward by the defender in the striping action.

Hahahaha
Seriously, just stay away from debate about the laws of the game

I'd consult my cat taking a dump on the daises before you about rule changes

 

[Raiderdave]

It's now easier for an official to adjudicate on strip's

They no longer have to concern themselves with other defenders having been involved in the tackle & dropping off the ball carrier
The single defender left still couldn't steal the ball
Now he can
Good practical change

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

So, tackler 1 goes in and positions himself to control the ball carrier.
Tackler 2 gets in on the ball.
Tackler 1 now removes himself from the tackle.
Tackler 2, having control of the ball, removes it and gains possession.

The question is whether the above is actually feasible when making a real, in-game tackle.

 

[Captain Apollo]

I agree that obviously the defender has played at the ball.
I also acknowledge the overriding rule as it currently exists is simple...if you play at the ball in any circumstances and the opposition recovers it then it is a fresh set of 6 tackles. I just believe there should be exceptions to that.
My thinking is the same as the charge down rule being an exception to the knock on rule. A charge down should be deemed a knock on except they decided to make it an exception to the rule (which I think must have come into existence as recognition for the fact it is an awesome effort play by the defender).
So basically in my way of thinking with the strip is, if you want to encourage the ball carrier to control the ball and you want to encourage some competition for the ball and you want to reward one on one tackles then make the strip an exception to the tackle count restart rule.
If the attacking team recovers it they still keep the ball for the reminder of the set of possession. They just shouldn't get the benefit of a new set of tackles since the ball carrier basically lost a one on one battle.

Your logic is flawed, and using the charge down as a comparison for stripping shows it. If a charge down occurs, and the kicking team regathers the ball they are awarded an additional 6 tackles as the team not in possession played at the ball. The same logic should apply in relation to stripping the ball. Most rules in rugby league follow the same basic logic to them unless specifically stated (e.g. no advantage from an infringement at the start or re-start of play).

Additionally, the fact the team with the ball lost it and has to scramble to try and re-gather the ball, thus causing a break down in any planned attacking move is the "win" for the tackling team. If the team who had the ball regathers, why should they be further penalised like you imagine. If we introduced this idea it would just see a massive increase in attempted strips, thus rewarding defence almost exclusively.

 

[Hutty1986]

The fortnight or so that they enforce this is going to be confusing