Quidgybo
Bench
- Messages
- 3,054
I throw another couple out there...
1) Put corner post style markers on the junction of the twenty metre and touch lines to aid in judging 40-20 kicks. It's already pretty straight forward for officials to judge whether the kicker is on or behind the 40 metre line, but there is often significant question, even with video replay, which side of the 20 metre line a ball bounces into touch. A non rigid foam or cardboard pole on the twenty metre line would help eliminate the guesswork in the majority of instances. It still wouldn't help for high bouncing balls but for virtually zero cost it would help get the correct ruling more often for what really can be a game turning decision.
2) Limit defenses to two men in the tackle and allow two on one strips. The effect of this would be three fold. Firstly it would open up the game, allowing more off loads in tackles and less slow pealing off in the tackle. Secondly it would help further in eliminating grapple type tackles and lower body twisting injuries sustained in gang tackles. Thirdly it would eliminate the questionable penalty/scrum for one on one strips when the player believes they are the only one in the tackle, or when the referee believes he sees two men involved in the tackle when there is really only one. As a byproduct it would make the attacker more accountable for holding onto the ball.
The limit against three men in the tackle (or gang tackles) would require some specific interpretation to ensure it doesn't become an equally controversial and penalty ridden area to the current stripping law. Firstly you can still have more than two in the tackle defending off your own goal line or in your own in-goal. So the referee isn't going to penalise you if you're trying to hold up an attacker in-goal or push a player back from the goal-line. Second you can still have more than two in the tackle when trying to trap an opponent in his own in-goal. The rule is meant to change general play, not make last ditch defense less effective.
After that you get into the common sense areas of interpretation. If you have one man around the ball, and one man is slipping off the legs then the the third man coming in low shouldn't be penalised just because he makes contact momentarily before the man slipping off loses contact. As a general rule two men low and one man high, while technically illegal, would probably be let go unless the referee thinks the team is consistently and deliberately offending. But two men high and one man low or any other combination of three or more would be enforced. And a three man strip would always be penalised.
The optional aspect to this rule would be that the referee would not enforce it out of the blue. Like the bouncer in Test cricket, the ref would not call a no-ball on every occasion. He'd officially warn the captain, "Hey I've seen your boys makes a couple of three man tackles in the last few minutes, I'll penalise the next one". The point of this rule isn't to create another area of the game that generates 50-50 penalties and match turning refereeing controversies. It's to cut down on high injury risk gang tackles; eliminate the stripping penalty lottery and force attackers to take responsibility for ball security; and encourage more second phase play by reducing the number of players coming in high around the ball and the head.
Leigh.
1) Put corner post style markers on the junction of the twenty metre and touch lines to aid in judging 40-20 kicks. It's already pretty straight forward for officials to judge whether the kicker is on or behind the 40 metre line, but there is often significant question, even with video replay, which side of the 20 metre line a ball bounces into touch. A non rigid foam or cardboard pole on the twenty metre line would help eliminate the guesswork in the majority of instances. It still wouldn't help for high bouncing balls but for virtually zero cost it would help get the correct ruling more often for what really can be a game turning decision.
2) Limit defenses to two men in the tackle and allow two on one strips. The effect of this would be three fold. Firstly it would open up the game, allowing more off loads in tackles and less slow pealing off in the tackle. Secondly it would help further in eliminating grapple type tackles and lower body twisting injuries sustained in gang tackles. Thirdly it would eliminate the questionable penalty/scrum for one on one strips when the player believes they are the only one in the tackle, or when the referee believes he sees two men involved in the tackle when there is really only one. As a byproduct it would make the attacker more accountable for holding onto the ball.
The limit against three men in the tackle (or gang tackles) would require some specific interpretation to ensure it doesn't become an equally controversial and penalty ridden area to the current stripping law. Firstly you can still have more than two in the tackle defending off your own goal line or in your own in-goal. So the referee isn't going to penalise you if you're trying to hold up an attacker in-goal or push a player back from the goal-line. Second you can still have more than two in the tackle when trying to trap an opponent in his own in-goal. The rule is meant to change general play, not make last ditch defense less effective.
After that you get into the common sense areas of interpretation. If you have one man around the ball, and one man is slipping off the legs then the the third man coming in low shouldn't be penalised just because he makes contact momentarily before the man slipping off loses contact. As a general rule two men low and one man high, while technically illegal, would probably be let go unless the referee thinks the team is consistently and deliberately offending. But two men high and one man low or any other combination of three or more would be enforced. And a three man strip would always be penalised.
The optional aspect to this rule would be that the referee would not enforce it out of the blue. Like the bouncer in Test cricket, the ref would not call a no-ball on every occasion. He'd officially warn the captain, "Hey I've seen your boys makes a couple of three man tackles in the last few minutes, I'll penalise the next one". The point of this rule isn't to create another area of the game that generates 50-50 penalties and match turning refereeing controversies. It's to cut down on high injury risk gang tackles; eliminate the stripping penalty lottery and force attackers to take responsibility for ball security; and encourage more second phase play by reducing the number of players coming in high around the ball and the head.
Leigh.
