More Rule Changes Take the NRL Further Away from SL and International Rules

[deluded pom?]

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/20-40-kick-to-be-introduced-in-the-nrl/

 

[Jim from Oz]

Yep, totally agree with the topic name … does the ARLC EVER consider that RL is played outside of Oz and NZ?
This sort of thing REALLY pi**es me off !

 

[deluded pom?]

It’s not like there’s any discussion with any other party other than within the NRL. I’m not even sure the new rules are that good either. I’m really looking forward to some more kicking, not. If the NRL aren’t careful they’ll be evolving into union.

 

[jim_57]

I was interested to find out on TRL that tackling an attacking player in the air has always been an NRL/Australia rule. England and International rules have never had it apparently and from what I could find it looks like that's correct.

 

[deluded pom?]

I was interested to find out on TRL that tackling an attacking player in the air has always been an NRL/Australia rule. England and International rules have never had it apparently and from what I could find it looks like that's correct.

In SL they are allowed to contest a high ball but you’re not allowed to tackle a player in the air if you don’t make any effort to win the ball.

 

[thorson1987]

In SL they are allowed to contest a high ball but you’re not allowed to tackle a player in the air if you don’t make any effort to win the ball.

Which is what the NRL has changed the rule to.

 

[adamkungl]

Against the grain - i don't think it matters right now that the NRL and SL, or anywhere else, have minor regional rules variations.

If and when the sport grows to have more professional competitions and the international game has more financial value than any national body, it might become more of an issue where the International body needs to draw a line in the sand.

What IS an issue however, is when the NRL forces its rule changes and interpretations on international competitions. Often without much warning or agreement from other parties.
Eg, the Lebanon player age eligiblity issue at the 9s.
The only party in charge of test and tournament rules should be the IRL.

 

[deluded pom?]

Against the grain - i don't think it matters right now that the NRL and SL, or anywhere else, have minor regional rules variations.

If and when the sport grows to have more professional competitions and the international game has more financial value than any national body, it might become more of an issue where the International body needs to draw a line in the sand.

What IS an issue however, is when the NRL forces its rule changes and interpretations on international competitions. Often without much warning or agreement from other parties.
Eg, the Lebanon player age eligiblity issue at the 9s.
The only party in charge of test and tournament rules should be the IRL.

If countries unilaterally make their own rule changes, however minor, then when they meet another country in an international game we then need a third set of rules (unless one actually uses the international rules). It then becomes increasingly confusing for players, referees and fans. Even worse is when we have seen a NRL ref use NRL rules that aren’t part of international rules. We see Australia v NZ reffed to NRL rules with the only acknowledgment being a single ref on the pitch. It’s amateur hour again.

 

[siv]

Reading that the penalty for tackling a attacking player in the aur

Is already a international rule

 

[deluded pom?]

Reading that the penalty for tackling a attacking player in the aur

Is already a international rule

True but the 20/40 and choosing where to set the scrum or restarting wth a tap after the ball hits a trainer/water carrier isn’t.

 

[adamkungl]

If countries unilaterally make their own rule changes, however minor, then when they meet another country in an international game we then need a third set of rules (unless one actually uses the international rules). It then becomes increasingly confusing for players, referees and fans. Even worse is when we have seen a NRL ref use NRL rules that aren’t part of international rules. We see Australia v NZ reffed to NRL rules with the only acknowledgment being a single ref on the pitch. It’s amateur hour again.

The third (read: default) set of rules is/should be the international rules.

The IRL should be providing and instructing neutral referees and Australia should not be influencing the rules of international games.
To me this is the larger issue - solve this and it doesn't matter if the NRL introduces multiball when the game clock hits 33:33, international games will be 'clean'.

 

[deluded pom?]

The third (read: default) set of rules is/should be the international rules.

The IRL should be providing and instructing neutral referees and Australia should not be influencing the rules of international games.
To me this is the larger issue - solve this and it doesn't matter if the NRL introduces multiball when the game clock hits 33:33, international games will be 'clean'.

I agree adam but Australia/ NRL are influencing how international games are being played. I haven’t seen the match but which rules were the recent Tonga v Australia game played under? Was it totally international rules or were there NRL rules used?

 

[siv]

Classic GF try and why the scrum should remain in the game

 

[Welsh RL & RU watcher]

Classic GF try and why the scrum should remain in the game

It wasn't a classic try IMO. The fact is the RU ones have gravitas, as well as the RU drop-goal. RL does not lend itself to the scrum and scrum plays in comparison to RU, and the drop-goal doesn't lend itself to RL either IMO. Most ppl will compare the two scrums, and the RL scrum is embarrassing and should go. The RL WC should be a 5 team competition spread over 4 years as it was between 1989 and 1992. Play home and away over three seasons with the final obviously in the fourth.

 

[siv]

It wasn't a classic try IMO. The fact is the RU has gravitas, as well as the RU drop-goal. RL does not lend itself to the scrum and scrum plays in comparison to RU, and the drop-goal doesn't lend itself to RL either IMO. Most ppl will compare the two scrums, and the RL scrum is embarrassing and should go. The RL WC should be a 5 team competition spread over 4 years as it was between 1989 and 1992. Play home and away over three seasons with the final obviously in the fourth.

While some scrums might as well be a handover eg a defending scrum in the 30m zone

Scrums from 60m out are used in a attacking manner

 

[Welsh RL & RU watcher]

While some scrums might as well be a handover eg a defending scrum in the 30m zone

Scrums from 60m out are used in a attacking manner

You could have 7 on 7 plays instead.