2020 rule changes

[T-Boon]

The 20/40 has been setting the Curry Cup alight for 2 years now. Doubling the amount of weird fiddly rules for when & where you kick from in general play will be great for the game and ties in nicely with the extra fiddly scrum rules. Synergy!

The 20/40 is a great rule just as the 40/20 is. The fact coaches are too set in their risk averse ways to take advantage of it is not the rules fault.
Bring in other rules to make teams have to take more risks.

 

[AJB1102]

Players should have to carry the ball in 1 hand with an outstretched arm to add more risk. f**ken coaches!

 

[BadnMean]

The 20/40 is a great rule just as the 40/20 is. The fact coaches are too set in their risk averse ways to take advantage of it is not the rules fault.
Bring in other rules to make teams have to take more risks.

I love the 40/20.

I just don't think the 20/40 is necessary? It's fiddling for fiddlings sake. What glaring issue in the game is it solving? That's the reason for rule changes. I quite like it that if you defend well, with discipline & aggression you might just be able to, you know, get some reward for that like having territorial dominance for a few sets.

Then the other team has to work really hard or take a risk with some wide passes or produce a really great kick & chase to get out of it. You know, like a good game of footy. It might take them a few sets to work back into it or they might produce a break or concede a try, but pressure can be applied & then withstood or crack you open. A contest.

Adding more escape card lottery rules doesn't do much for me I'm afraid. Dropped balls, strips, penalties, intercepts, line breaks, there's all kinds of ways to bust out of the 20m zone already. Why make it easier to get out of trouble, harder for good defence to be rewarded & reward kicking the ball out, which is why people find union so boring & incentivises kicking out which makes it less likely the games most exciting running players- the back 3, will get involved?

I like the 7 tackle set rule exactly because it encourages not kicking the ball out & keeping a game flowing & allowing running players to run.

 

[T-Boon]

What glaring issue in the game is it solving? That's the reason for rule changes.

It is a much needed new way for players to make a big play. With defense so easy to do now and no space there is no way for players to make big territory flipping plays. Sadly it is the referees who are flipping the field and handing out opportunities in the attacking zone (there would be twice as many 50/50 penalties per game as big plays by players). So all the blame goes to refs.
We should get the rules to the point where when a coach is bitching about the referring at a press conference the media can turn on him about not taking advantage of all the opportunities in the game.

 

[typicalfan]

This is the reason for the attempt of putting the whistle away. People say no just blow as many penalties as possible until players get it, no that's Union.

Less penalties creates less stoppages which creates fatigue and the end of each half opens up a bit.

 

[BadnMean]

It is a much needed new way for players to make a big play. With defense so easy to do now and no space there is no way for players to make big territory flipping plays. Sadly it is the referees who are flipping the field and handing out opportunities in the attacking zone (there would be twice as many 50/50 penalties per game as big plays by players). So all the blame goes to refs.
We should get the rules to the point where when a coach is bitching about the referring at a press conference the media can turn on him about not taking advantage of all the opportunities in the game.

Defence isn't easy. Teams roll 40-60m downfield almost every set. It is rare to bog a team down for more than a few sets.
You're now saying the new rule was brought in to fix reffing? Or take the pressure off refs? Straw clutching of the highest order.

Twice as many close calls as big plays... So introducing a new rule will remove other close calls? Really.
Or the 0.5 x20/40s will thrill the crowds by watching a ball get kicked out so much that the other calls are forgotten? Maybe Channel Nein should just replace their jaded, whiny call team? This game goes mad on the refs I agree, its a weird culture, vicious circle of coaches looking for excuses, lazy journalism & the established mores of how the game is discussed. But this rule isn't addressing any of that.

 

[RufusRex]

— A challenge system for decisions in general play. The NRL is finalising how it will work.

This is brilliant ... Imagine you nail a kick, player makes it 1m into the field of play and takes the voluntary tackle. Captain immediately challenges and in his bestest loudest voice goes to the ref so that the mic picks it up "Law 11.4 Explicitly states that it is illegal for a player to deliberately allow himself to be tackled by falling to the ground" .. If you do not give us a penalty you are deliberately cheating us out of rightful possession.

 

[Travitoh]

I'm all for 20/40 and would even introduce 30/30 BUT it shouldn't warrant a fresh set of six imo, only a continuation of the current tackle from the tap start. The metres gained out of it are reward enough, especially if we allow all onside players from the kick to get up field and restart play immediately.

 

[Perth Red]

If you enjoy watching players hoof the ball over the sideline, watch Union! Pointless rule change.

 

[T-Boon]

If you enjoy watching players hoof the ball over the sideline, watch Union! Pointless rule change.

I’d like to see fullbacks and wingers attempt it on the first or second tackle. That would be way better than dummy half runs and hit ups.

 

[T-Boon]

The NRL channel should televise a 20/40 competition. To find the 20/40 champion. Who would win such a comp? Ricky Stuart?

 

[Walt Flanigan]

— A challenge system for decisions in general play. The NRL is finalising how it will work.

This is brilliant ... Imagine you nail a kick, player makes it 1m into the field of play and takes the voluntary tackle. Captain immediately challenges and in his bestest loudest voice goes to the ref so that the mic picks it up "Law 11.4 Explicitly states that it is illegal for a player to deliberately allow himself to be tackled by falling to the ground" .. If you do not give us a penalty you are deliberately cheating us out of rightful possession.

That would be amazing

 

[Saxon]

This is the reason for the attempt of putting the whistle away. People say no just blow as many penalties as possible until players get it, no that's Union.

Less penalties creates less stoppages which creates fatigue and the end of each half opens up a bit.

Nope. Less penalties means more more offside, more wrestling, more blocking, more flops, more breaking early from scrums, more rubbish play-the-balls.
Less penalties means a worse spectacle and more blatant cheating.

 

[typicalfan]

Nope. Less penalties means more more offside, more wrestling, more blocking, more flops, more breaking early from scrums, more rubbish play-the-balls.
Less penalties means a worse spectacle and more blatant cheating.

I don't think that way regarding wrestling. Wrestling has been pretty prevalent for a long time. Wrestling is harder to do when fatigued imo.

I don't mean ignoring legitimate penalties but less nitpick penalties and obvious penalty swings to even up penalty counts or penalty kpis.

 

[BadnMean]

I’d like to see fullbacks and wingers attempt it on the first or second tackle. That would be way better than dummy half runs and hit ups.

Well played, I've been sucked in by a troll account. This guy is exactly describing union back 3 hoofing the ball away as great entertainment.

 

[Springs09]

I don't think that way regarding wrestling. Wrestling has been pretty prevalent for a long time. Wrestling is harder to do when fatigued imo.

I don't mean ignoring legitimate penalties but less nitpick penalties and obvious penalty swings to even up penalty counts or penalty kpis.

Wrestling is much easier to do then quickly getting up and getting back onside when fatigued, trust me.

 

[T-Boon]

Well played, I've been sucked in by a troll account. This guy is exactly describing union back 3 hoofing the ball away as great entertainment.

I am being troll triggered here by a fake trigger troll account.

 

[gerg]

— A challenge system for decisions in general play. The NRL is finalising how it will work.

This is brilliant ... Imagine you nail a kick, player makes it 1m into the field of play and takes the voluntary tackle. Captain immediately challenges and in his bestest loudest voice goes to the ref so that the mic picks it up "Law 11.4 Explicitly states that it is illegal for a player to deliberately allow himself to be tackled by falling to the ground" .. If you do not give us a penalty you are deliberately cheating us out of rightful possession.

Or when a player gets sinbinned for getting punched in the head

 

[typicalfan]

Wrestling is much easier to do then quickly getting up and getting back onside when fatigued, trust me.

Agreed but I don't think that we should be saying fatigue is bad in the game as it will create more wrestling when wrestling itself was born out of the post Super league era where the fatigue in the game was mainly reduced or taken out.

Less fatigue = better and more effective wrestling.

 

[forby]

This is the reason for the attempt of putting the whistle away. People say no just blow as many penalties as possible until players get it, no that's Union.

Less penalties creates less stoppages which creates fatigue and the end of each half opens up a bit.

They should be penalising everything. If teams play by the rules there would then be more fatigue as there would be less penalties. Teams deliberately give away penalties to slow the play, set defensive lines etc. If the sin bin is consistently applied for such deliberate offences it would clear them up fairly quickly.