Bomb Limit

[Mr Saab]

Seriously you talkin sport listeners need to get some new material.

If a team has earned themselves the field position to put up a bomb then they can go for their lives.

Haha...it has come straight from that negative show

 

[aqua_duck]

Funnily enough we have scored very few tries from kicks this year.

Thats because all the other teams have figured you out

 

[Danish]

Thats because all the other teams have figured you out

For that to be true, it would mean that there is a proven method for defending bombs, yet from what people appear to be saying they are a complete coin toss option which cannot be defended.


So which is it?? Is a bomb simply a tactic which can be negated or is it a lottery which needs to be rubbed out of the game?

 

[Tom Ace]

Thats because all the other teams have figured you out

And we've still been scoring plenty of tries (can't stop them mind you).

Which would negate your point completely.

 

[Lego_Man]

Haha...it has come straight from that negative show

And/or Phil Gould's a-hole...

 

[Chook Norris]

if there was a minute left on the clock, last tackle, 40 metres out, and the bomb was basically the only viable option .. what could you do?

 

[Meth]

Scared the demons might came back to haunt Manu again this week?

I'm pretty sure he's a Raiders fan

 

[Jason Maher]

Who gives a sh*t how you get the 4 points, as long as you get them!

 

[Bring it home Knights]

The mid-field bomb youve seen alot of this year is a tactic they use in the NFL. There looking for hang time to allow the line to get to the man as he catches it.

If he drops it fine, but its desinded to restrict metre gainage. Dont really know what you can do about it. Allowing the kicker to be untouched hasnt helped the situation.

Just another example of why coaches should have NO say whatsover in rule changes

I could not agree more!!!

 

[Raider_69]

not interested
nothing wrong with the bomb, its a good play, some teams are better at coming down with them then others... thats footy

 

[adamkungl]

Funnily enough we have scored very few tries from kicks this year.

Don't let facts get in the way of a good Rooster bashing. There are some seriously pathetic people on this site...

 

[TimmyB]

I'd like to see teams get given greater reward - perhaps put ball caught inside the 10 metre line on the full should be advanced to the 30?

 

[Billythekid]

I'd like to see teams get given greater reward - perhaps put ball caught inside the 10 metre line on the full should be advanced to the 30?

These sort of suggestions are insane. Keep this sort of complicated impossible to police stuff out of our game.

The refs already have enough trouble and we know how easy they f*ck things up so why make things even more complicated for the refs and the fans.

Keep it simple please. Simplicity is what fans want (it's a big part of the reason soccer is so popular IMO).

Bombs aren't really much of an issue so why go through all this effort to change things. I actually think it is quite exciting and i think it forces teams to actually have skillful wingers/fullbacks instead of just big or fast guys.

Personally i think when Lockyer, Inglis, Anasta or whoever puts up a big bomb you can feel the tension in the crowd it's fantastic.

 

[Talanexor]

Bombs aren't that hard to stop. You get a winger who can catch and you get the centre/fullback, backrowers etc to shield him. I've noticed this being done a few times this year, especially when teams are up against Folau.

Bombing is a legitimate tactic, shielding is a legitimate defence against it.

So don't ban it, don't limit it. And whoever suggested the automatic 20m restart for defusing a bomb - there is one problem with your suggestion. This eliminates cross-field kicks to wingers, chip-n-chase kicks and virtually every attacking kick that isn't a grubber.

If 5 one-out runs and a bomb to end the set are a team's only attacking option, the fault lies with the coach and players, not the rulebook.

 

[Eels Dude]

What a ridicious idea... it's not like cricket where you have an hour to decide when you use your powerplays. Imagine every player having to keep count of how many bombs have been put up...

Player 1: "Oh yeah i'm close to the line on the 5th, need to put a kick up... I don't want to waste a bomb though... that's even if we have one left... better consult the captain..."

Captain: "Yeah coach wants us to save our last bomb for the last 20 minutes... but he recommends a half bomb. So it looks like a bomb but doesn't go as high. The only problem is the ref might think it's a bomb and disallow the try if we get one"

 

[manly40gimps0]

banning BOMBS no way dogs fans will never agree

 

[Non Terminator]

Assuming that's a pathetic attempt at comedy?

 

[zaibatsu]

Imagine every player having to keep count of how many bombs have been put up...

1.. 2.. 3.. How Difficult...

 

[Didgi]

Bombs aren't that hard to stop. You get a winger who can catch and you get the centre/fullback, backrowers etc to shield him. I've noticed this being done a few times this year, especially when teams are up against Folau.

Bombing is a legitimate tactic, shielding is a legitimate defence against it.

So don't ban it, don't limit it. And whoever suggested the automatic 20m restart for defusing a bomb - there is one problem with your suggestion. This eliminates cross-field kicks to wingers, chip-n-chase kicks and virtually every attacking kick that isn't a grubber.

If 5 one-out runs and a bomb to end the set are a team's only attacking option, the fault lies with the coach and players, not the rulebook.

Shielding isn't actually supposed to be a legitimate tactic, it's just that the refs ATM aren't setting the game on fire.

1.. 2.. 3.. How Difficult...

:lol: It's not about counting them, it's about rationing and saving them till just the right moment... Crazy idea. Would we have a 5th referee with a Kick Counter?:lol:

 

[Canard]

Whats boring about a bomb?

I think fans of the defensive side hate it cause its such a lottery, but thats what makes it exciting the unpredictability.