New rule - Charge downs

[ollie515]

"Steve Price certainly knows it makes sense."

Ask Tony Caine how much sense it makes.

I think that if a player goes for a chargedown and hits the kicker at all after the ball leaves his foot then it should be considered roughing the kicker and the kicking team gets the ball with a new set of six where it lands..

The Chargedown needs to be stamped out all together for the sake of players injuries and Steve Price should be the first to go!

 

[Billythekid]

"Steve Price certainly knows it makes sense."

Ask Tony Caine how much sense it makes.

I think that if a player goes for a chargedown and hits the kicker at all after the ball leaves his foot then it should be considered roughing the kicker and the kicking team gets the ball with a new set of six where it lands..

The Chargedown needs to be stamped out all together for the sake of players injuries and Steve Price should be the first to go!

We should also fill the halves jerseys with cotton wool just to be sure.

 

[Tommy Smith]

We should also fill the halves jerseys with cotton wool just to be sure.

Yep. And instead of tackles we should give the players water pistols.

 

[Hanscholo]

I think if they changed the chargedown rule so that it didnt place the kicking team onside if the ball still ends up in front of the kicker that would work well.

It takes away a lot of the luck element for the defending side and is an incentive to keep the kicking team or at least some of them on side which will open up the running game for a kick return a little more. Having a line of 10 or so greating the fullback is hurting the kick returns a lot, its more like a hitup these days.

Currently its pure luck for a chargedown to work. Usually the ball ends up spraying forward from the kicker off the defender and one of his team mates gathers the ball as they are usually the closest to it, most of which were in front of him when he kicked it. If they change it so that they remain offside then it gives a much higher chance for a re-gather for the defending side.

That would work well for a number of reasons, it just comes down to the question as to wether you want that type of play in the game. Personally i think a trial of it would be worthwhile, especially if it can be shown to greatly advantage the defenders and forces less players to take off early on kick chase.

 

[ollie515]

So does this make sense?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjOev6TVeZM = praise him and a change to the law to promote it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypODBSW3wSs = 7 weeks and castigated..

Just because he didnt hit the head doesnt mean it aint dangerous - probably more so.

 

[perverse]

Why should a charge down be the only time a team can deliberately touch the ball, fail to gain control and not give the opposition another six tackles? You're already allowed to knock the ball on when charging down a kick, why make it any more of a special situation?

very well said. i wish i could have put it so succinctly.

 

[dallymessenger]

On the topic of rule changes, and which ideas are good or bad, i personally think that its time for charge downs to be rewarded instead of penalised.

Why should a great defensive effort result in another set of 6? Think about it. In basketball if a player blocks a shot the shot-clock doesnt restart. Nope, because that woud be stupid.

But in rugby league if a defender rushes out and manages to charge down the kick or a field goal attempt, the team kicking the ball invariably regathers it and gets another set of 6 as reward for their kicker not getting it away quick enough.

Time to change the rule. Reward the defensive team. You know i make sense. Steve Price certainly knows it makes sense.

good point, i agree

charge down = play on from the same tackle if the kicking team gets the ball back

 

[perverse]

the thing is - it's always a low percentage play trying to play at the ball be it a strip attempt, intercept attempt or chargedown attempt. the rules are set up thusly in order to advantage the team that is in possession.

what is so special about chargedowns that you all feel the need to favour the defense on this one? if the defense plays at the ball, the attacking team should have their tackle count restarted.

at the rate you are all going at... the rules will be as complex and geniused as union. the more we complicate and add conditions to our rules, the less attractive it will become to new fans.

 

[flamin]

What exactly constitutes a chargedown?

If the defence knock-on a grubber kick before it bounces - is that a chargedown?

How far does the defender have to be from point where the ball leaves the kickers foot?

 

[Hanscholo]

Yea your right, the rule regarding a chargedown is as grey as it can be anyway. Its a matter of judgement i guess as to what constitutes a chargedown. Its a classic case of a number of RL rules that just dont apply in every instance and arent properly defined.

Download the rule book, there are plenty of em.

 

[Eels Dude]

What exactly constitutes a chargedown?

If the defence knock-on a grubber kick before it bounces - is that a chargedown?

How far does the defender have to be from point where the ball leaves the kickers foot?

You can't really charge down a grubber. A proper grubber would be moving too slowly and be too low to be charged down.

Keep the rule the way it is. If the defending side want to take the risk it's up to them. Relax the rule and then every defending side is going to be attempting charge downs on every set of six. I see it like the 40/20 attempt, a great reward when pulled of correctly, but shouldnt be overused.

 

[Pass the Ball]

If the opposition plays at the ball, it is 6 again....

Let's just keep it simple....

 

[Billigan]

i think they need to change the rule

 

[The Business]

On the topic of rule changes, and which ideas are good or bad, i personally think that its time for charge downs to be rewarded instead of penalised.

Why should a great defensive effort result in another set of 6? Think about it. In basketball if a player blocks a shot the shot-clock doesnt restart. Nope, because that woud be stupid.

But in rugby league if a defender rushes out and manages to charge down the kick or a field goal attempt, the team kicking the ball invariably regathers it and gets another set of 6 as reward for their kicker not getting it away quick enough.

Time to change the rule. Reward the defensive team. You know i make sense. Steve Price certainly knows it makes sense.

I don't agree. A charge down is a deliberate attempt by the defending team to stop a kick from giving the attacking team a territorial advantage. If the charge down is unsuccessful then the defending team shouldn't then be rewarded by having good field position. It's no different to playing at the ball when an attacking player is off loading or putting in a grubber.