What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

40/30 - it should be time

8Ball

First Grade
Messages
5,132
A 40-30 is probably too simple and would be overused.

However, I am in favour of a general 40 metre touchfinder kick advantage rule. Why? Because I've seen it trialed already in real life in an experimental match and it improved the game dramatically.

When teams were attacking from their own half two scenarios occurred -- the defence dropped back their wingers which encouraged the attack to throw the ball around in their own half to create overlaps. This generated more linebreak runs from their own half. I'd say this kind of play is lacking at NRL level. This rule discourages simplistic dummy half hit ups and invites more creativity in attack.

But -- when defences were trying to plug those overlaps by drawing their wingers in, precision touchfinders gave (not always) the attack repeat sets.

Overall the game became more about ball passing then about wrestling and gang tackling. In fact, the more players involved in a tackle, the attack would often exploit the extra tackler's inability to cover the defensive line.

What makes this better than a 40-30 is that is can be used by the attack anywhere in their own half (in this case the half line was the cut off). For 40-20s defences can prepare to cover a kick by knowing where the attack is on the field and drop back solely for that tackle. In a general 40 metre touchfinder there is no such predictability.

That said it is still a difficult task to do. If the NRL were to implement it I'd say we'd see around 3 to 4 times as many touchfinder attempts -- however not all of them will work as it's still a risk. But we'd also see more variety in attack, less wrestling and more tries overall due to the shift to a more attacking game.

I definitely would like to see that rule tried. Would inject much needed freshness to the game without changing its fabric. Would really put spreading the ball early deep in your half back into play

Would also make the game less about territory.

Something to consider would also be to add additional interchange players on the bench. Make the game more accessible to players with less fitness to get into the game, and I suspect coaches at NRL level would pick more impact players and attacking players on the bench. Also makes HIA less of a game defining issue
 
Last edited:

some11

Coach
Messages
17,998
We must absolutely come up with some bastardized version of the game to counter AFLX.
 

POPEYE

Coach
Messages
11,397
I definitely would like to see that rule tried. Would inject much needed freshness to the game without changing its fabric. Would really put spreading the ball early deep in your half back into play

Would also make the game less about territory.

Something to consider would also be to add additional interchange players on the bench. Make the game more accessible to players with less fitness to get into the game, and I suspect coaches at NRL level would pick more impact players and attacking players on the bench. Also makes HIA less of a game defining issue
We don't need an NFL clone here . . . too much reality tv already
 
Messages
2,399
I definitely would like to see that rule tried. Would inject much needed freshness to the game without changing its fabric. Would really put spreading the ball early deep in your half back into play

Would also make the game less about territory.

Something to consider would also be to add additional interchange players on the bench. Make the game more accessible to players with less fitness to get into the game, and I suspect coaches at NRL level would pick more impact players and attacking players on the bench. Also makes HIA less of a game defining issue

eff off, less fit into the sport, no. Should go to 11 a side, need to see less running behind players and less obstructions/decoy runners. If it was 11 a side I still think England would have beaten Australia in the opening match of the 2013 WC in Cardiff.

And Samoa would have scored a couple of tries yesterday. And reduce the in-goal area to at least 7m, would like to see it go to 5.9 metres. Ffs, we had a WC Cup Final with only a 4.1m in-goal area.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
12,832
You don't honestly believe 40/20 is a better rule than the corner post rules for players in possession of the ball

That is a good rule change because you see its impact a lot - I assume the rule change originated in Super League.
I agree it is better than the 40/20 rule but only because 40/20 is close to obsolete (30 successful attempts in a full season of 292 games and defences barely needing to account for it as a threat).
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
10,390
Should go to 11 a side

Even with 4 less players on the field the balance between attack and defence remains the same -- yes there are bigger defensive gaps but also fewer attacking players to exploit them. Teams will still play conservatively by making dummy half runs because it will continue to yield the most metres.

The only way to change this dynamic is to take defensive players out of the defensive line. That's what expanding the 40/20 to general 40m rule does -- attacking teams can get a 13 on 10/11 advantage encouraging more passing to exploit gaps. But when defences change their strategy and draw in their line so it's 13 on 12/13 then attacking teams can mix their strategy with more kicks. It will fluctuate throughout the game. The game becomes less about wrestling, obstructions and milking penalties and more about passing, kicking and linebreaks.
 
Messages
2,399
Even with 4 less players on the field the balance between attack and defence remains the same -- yes there are bigger defensive gaps but also fewer attacking players to exploit them. Teams will still play conservatively by making dummy half runs because it will continue to yield the most metres.

The only way to change this dynamic is to take defensive players out of the defensive line. That's what expanding the 40/20 to general 40m rule does -- attacking teams can get a 13 on 10/11 advantage encouraging more passing to exploit gaps. But when defences change their strategy and draw in their line so it's 13 on 12/13 then attacking teams can mix their strategy with more kicks. It will fluctuate throughout the game. The game becomes less about wrestling, obstructions and milking penalties and more about passing, kicking and linebreaks.

I would allow more markers, allow 4, where their inside foot of the defender 'only' needs to be in line with the outside shoulder of the player playing the ball. The space on the outside should compel players to pass out wide, I want to see more long passes straight to the wingers, and to see wingers more or less one on one against each other, would luv to see Addo-Carr burn ppl on the outside, 50m out. It would be embarrassing not to use the outside, coaches would give more license to pass wide if there was more space there, defences would be narrower. We have to break this Melbourne style apart, RL was always meant to be about tries, passing and running, look how many Brian Bevan and B Boston scored. Jim Sullivan and Lewis Jones scored a tonne of points, granted they were playing more matches then, but that's what it was mostly about, our outside backs were meant to be more important than what they were in RU.
 

POPEYE

Coach
Messages
11,397
Keep the rules as they are, make all scrums consist of players from #8 to #13 only . . . or their replacements . . . reduce the interchange to 4

Let's see if letting the Backs make the difference they're supposed to is better than concocting f**king dick-in-hand changes to the game
 
Messages
2,399
Fine, preferably I would like to keep it at 13-a-side. And deep down, I know what i'd like to see, and it would then stay at 13 a side; that would be bringing back continuous live rucks. A good game of RU does have more ebb and flow to it than a RL match. And I find it more compelling than watching RL. Ppl will tell me to f off to RU, as some have, but I won't, as I don't want to watch a competitive scrum and line-out, and the are too many on the pitch in RU.

Also, if a player passes the ball into touch then it's a tip-off, as in basketball, 10m from touch. No RL type scrums, have the option of a 7 on 7 play if ball is kicked into touch. Start match, and have re-starts with a rake back (ptb), 25m from the try line, opposition start on 40m line. Can get rid of the word dummy-half then :) Nos. 8-10 would be called front-row forwards and 11-13 loose-forwards. RL has become too structured for me, it's too much about a low error rate and high completions. Read that at the start of one season Cameron Smith went the first 5 matches without one single error, that should be impossible. Want to see full-backs under more pressure as regards decision making too.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
12,832
Let's see if letting the Backs make the difference they're supposed to is better than concocting f**king dick-in-hand changes to the game

The biggest dick in hand changes to the game have come from the coaches - namely Bellamy...and are a result of the rules and the rules committee not keeping up to speed with the coaching manipulations. You have to constantly change rules or else coaches change/manipulate the game play into something like what we have now.

It is like the tax department trying to keep up with the tax manipulators. At least the tax department is only 2 years behind rather than 10 years.

Best rugby league football team to watch right now is the Jillaroos - because they don't have any NRL influence and not much structure and if they complete a set it really is something special because they have also had a red hot go during that set.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
12,832
So to recap on this thread to date:

1. Most agree something needs to be done about the boring play we have;
2. 40/20 is arguably the best rule of last ten years though some argue that the corner post re-jig is more relevant and utilised so probably has the 40/20 covered;
3. For the second off season running I have suggested making the touch finding repeat set easier by making it 40/30;
4. Most are freaking out that that would be too easy to kick;
5. Those freaking out probably haven't put much thought into the defensive strategies that would go into stopping 40/30 (e.g. wingers back);
6. General 40 has been proposed and several agree (myself included) that that would be a fine rule change and would lead to an exciting brand of RLF compared to what we have now;
7. South West Wales Rabbitoh wants to go to continuous live rucks and a bunch of other rule changes and for some reason thinks we don't already know this and raises it again in 40/30 thread.
 
Messages
2,399
7. South West Wales Rabbitoh wants to go to continuous live rucks and a bunch of other rule changes and for some reason thinks we don't already know this and raises it again in 40/30 thread.

Sorry bout that.

I sometimes say I want to see continuous live rucks trialled, and that's what I mean, trialled. I'd like us to keep play-the-ball, but as I said, deep down it's just telling me that RU have probably got the ruck just about right. Firstly, you could get away with one referee and secondly it'll be easier to have more consistent refereeing of the off-side line.

But, I'm open to persuasion on the ruck area. But if we keep play-the-ball, then i'm convinced we should go to 11-a-side. I'd be fine with keeping the play-the-ball, but also ensure the players use their foot to roll it back, should be a free-kick if rolled back by the hand, should have to place it. If 11 a side, and teams going back 10m, players and coaches won't have an excuse about needing a quick play the ball as there would obviously be plenty of space on the pitch.
 
Last edited:

docbrown

Coach
Messages
10,390
We have to break this Melbourne style apart, RL was always meant to be about tries, passing and running

The shift towards a defensive playing style has impacted upon audience interest in the game. No one can argue against that.

It really is holding back the game.

Keep the rules as they are,

If rugby league had adopted that mantra then they'd still be playing rugby union...
 

Iafeta

Referee
Messages
24,357
I don't think your suggestions go far enough. Maybe we can reduce the teams to 11, who battle 2 players at once. But those two players are fitted out in padding and they have thick pieces of pounded wood. And they're protecting three sticks behind them. And instead of kicking for a 40-30, they should throw with a straight arm a smaller ball and try to hit those sticks ... and we should play it in summer. Maybe under lights. And on an oval.

Fwiw, rugby league is great IMO because of the actual gameplay. Don't change rules. But looking at the Tonga v NZ atmosphere, there was something there that is very rarely replicated at a game. The question I feel is how to replicate that.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
12,832
Fwiw, rugby league is great IMO because of the actual gameplay. Don't change rules. But looking at the Tonga v NZ atmosphere, there was something there that is very rarely replicated at a game. The question I feel is how to replicate that.

The thing with the Tonga v NZ game was the level of how "into it" the crowd was. During an NRL game the crowd gets "into it" for small sections of the game such as tries and line breaks and 40/20s. Problem is the game is dominated by sections of the game where the crowd just aren't very into it. These are the 5 and kick/completion sets. Neither the attack or the defence really wins the set. To use a cricket term they are the "60th over - forward defence" of rugby league. There are way too many of them over 80 minutes.

I think the key is to maximise those sections of the game that the crowd are "into it". Load the game with threats (presently the biggest threat in 5 and kick wrestle football is a f**king ruck penalty). Lets get it to the point where positive plays (line breaks, charge downs, 40/20s, interceptions etc) determine field position more than errors and penalties.
 
Top