7 Tackle Set

[siv]

Now we have the shot clocks at about the right level

Now its time to fix the 7 tackle set

It was brought in to stop long range licks to tack the fullbacks put of play

In the late 80s the catch on the full rule was brought in to reduce the number of bombs

I would like it adjusted as follows

Only kicks from beyond 40m out that go dead should result in a 7 tackle set

- fieldgoal attempts do not result in 7 tackles
- knockons in the field of play even if kicked dead should result in scrums
- knockons in goal should be 6 tackle set

- drop kicks that are not proper fieldgoal attempts eg not aimed at the posts (eg Slater) or become grubbers - are treated like notmal kicks

 

[NK Arsenal]

I agree and have been saying similar sentiments in private forums for years

If the aim is to kick the ball out then yes 7 tackles is fair enough. But when a team is trying to score points it is totally unfair.

 

[Bandwagon]

It's risk vs reward, the rule deliberately places more risk on the kick, so as to encourage the attack to run the ball rather than kick.

Which in turn rewards good defence, and allows for a good defensive set to swing momentum because a seven tackle set can be the reward for holding your line.

And swings in momentum make for a better spectacle, than random luck from a bomb for mine

 

[Saxon]

It's risk vs reward, the rule deliberately places more risk on the kick, so as to encourage the attack to run the ball rather than kick.

Which in turn rewards good defence, and allows for a good defensive set to swing momentum because a seven tackle set can be the reward for holding your line.

And swings in momentum make for a better spectacle, than random luck from a bomb for mine

Fair points.
I don't think the rule should apply to knock-ons in goal though. When a player is making an attempt to ground the ball 20 metres and seven tackles is a pretty harsh outcome.

 

[Springs09]

It should only be in place for kicks from over 40m out. No one is kicking it dead from 10 out to stop a fullback running it back. Even then it’s a bit harsh on kicks that go dead by one roll. Teams just aim for the sideline instead of the in-goal which is less entertaining.

Also kicks from outside the 20 that go dead on the full should be treated the same as a kick that goes out on the full.

 

[LineBall]

All too complicated. No 7 tackles sets at all. Any kick that goes dead results in a 6 tackles set restart from the 20 metre line or where the kick was taken - whichever gives the best advantage for the team taking the tap.

 

[Meapro Ham]

Just go back to the old rule. The 7 tackle rule is stupid and unecessary. Kicking it dead deliberately was never a regular tactic for most teams anyway.

 

[Mr Spock!]

Having to ref kids games and yeah the rules do get confusing eg when do tackle counts start. Zero tackles on knock ons and balls kicked dead.

 

[RufusRex]

I would go with kick outside the 40 that lands inside the 10 is a 7 tackle set ...

 

[Iafeta]

Now we have the shot clocks at about the right level

Now its time to fix the 7 tackle set

It was brought in to stop long range licks to tack the fullbacks put of play

In the late 80s the catch on the full rule was brought in to reduce the number of bombs

I would like it adjusted as follows

Only kicks from beyond 40m out that go dead should result in a 7 tackle set

- fieldgoal attempts do not result in 7 tackles
- knockons in the field of play even if kicked dead should result in scrums
- knockons in goal should be 6 tackle set

- drop kicks that are not proper fieldgoal attempts eg not aimed at the posts (eg Slater) or become grubbers - are treated like notmal kicks

Amen. Praise the freakin lord.

The idea was brought in because some teams had been kicking dead to minimise Billy Slater catching out poor kick chase lines. It was a defensive ploy and should have been stopped. And this did it.

Wholeheartedly agree with you. If your 10m out you are not aiming to take the speedy fullback out. You’re aiming to get a repeat set or try. The intent is positive and constructive, same as attempting to ground the ball, but in doing so you may be penalised. That’s contradictory to why the rule was first mooted in the first place.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Just scrap it altogether

 

[TheVelourFog]

knee-jerk rule that should never have been implemented

you can't just legislate for every possible tactic

 

[Burwood]

Slater is retired, so the rule is no longer needed to provide him special treatment.

 

[RufusRex]

it was Hayne .. dragons kicked dead in a game vs parra to stop Haynes kick returns.

Stupid that so many positive kicks that just fail are penalised the same way .

 

[Incorrect]

Amen. Praise the freakin lord.

The idea was brought in because some teams had been kicking dead to minimise Billy Slater catching out poor kick chase lines. It was a defensive ploy and should have been stopped. And this did it.

Wholeheartedly agree with you. If your 10m out you are not aiming to take the speedy fullback out. You’re aiming to get a repeat set or try. The intent is positive and constructive, same as attempting to ground the ball, but in doing so you may be penalised. That’s contradictory to why the rule was first mooted in the first place.

Not quite. Was prompted by Soward kicking it to Carlingford at Parra Stadium trying to nullify Hayne kick returns.
The rules that were introduced because of Slater were you're not allowed to lead with your feet/legs when trying to stop someone scoring and you're not allowed to stick your leg out parallel to the ground, studs out kung fu style at your opponents face when taking a kick and probably some other dirty shit he used to do that escapes me right now....

 

[Game_Breaker]

7 tackles is too much of an advantage, a 20m re-start with 6 tackles in enough

 

[firechild]

It's risk vs reward, the rule deliberately places more risk on the kick, so as to encourage the attack to run the ball rather than kick.

Which in turn rewards good defence, and allows for a good defensive set to swing momentum because a seven tackle set can be the reward for holding your line.

And swings in momentum make for a better spectacle, than random luck from a bomb for mine

A 20m start on the set is plenty of advantage for defending your line.

 

[Pedge1971]

Not quite. Was prompted by Soward kicking it to Carlingford at Parra Stadium trying to nullify Hayne kick returns.
The rules that were introduced because of Slater were you're not allowed to lead with your feet/legs when trying to stop someone scoring and you're not allowed to stick your leg out parallel to the ground, studs out kung fu style at your opponents face when taking a kick and probably some other dirty shit he used to do that escapes me right now....

The Slater rule never worked. Should have just let the other team bite a chunk of his ear off Jimmy Graham style and that would have stopped the little cheating merkin

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

No halfback should be punished that severely for wanting to take risks with a good kick. It's a stupid rule and it needs to be catapulted. Fullbacks are still as dominant in the game as they were before the rule was introduced.

 

[T-Boon]

In the late 80s the catch on the full rule was brought in to reduce the number of bombs

What was this rule?