NRL to experiment rule changes in Round 20 dead rubbers

[greenBV4]

Good stuff. Both games were absolutely meaningless. Now they are actually important and could be a catalyst for another significant rule change.

Make them play in their underwear for all I care (I care).

nah now when the dronkos loose and get their first spoon they'll blame it on the rule testing, and not the burning pile of shit their season has been

 

[LeagueXIII]

It's becoming a bit like touch football tbh. The speed, the contact, the feigning injuries

The repetition.

 

[Mr Spock!]

The forwards idea is dumb but is a consequence of making scrums no contest.

That's what happens when you change rules.

 

[Fangs]

nah now when the dronkos loose and get their first spoon they'll blame it on the rule testing, and not the burning pile of shit their season has been

If they blame it on rule testing that will be even better. A proud organisation like the Broncos making excuses for their absolutely shithouse season is great.

 

[Mr Spock!]

Will forwards wear a bib?

 

[LineBall]

Will forwards wear a bib?

All forwards must wear electrical tape around the head.

 

[PARRA_FAN]

I dont mind them experimenting rules in dead rubber games but some of these are bit strange. Im not a fan of the off side rule and the ref calls six again. To me thats always a penalty, as you see players constantly doing it.

 

[jargan83]

They'd still struggle to score.

They'd score once and still lose 54-50

 

[Pole]

At least will add some interest into those games.

 

[Frailty]

Offside being given a set restart instead of a penalty is really absurd. Why? If I'm a coach, I'm telling the team to be ultra aggressive in defence when the opposition is in their own 20m. A set restart is not a strong enough penalty when I could pin the opposition in their own zone.

Play the ball after a kick - I honestly don't care. I don't understand the obsession about getting rid of the scrum.

Change to the referral process - It's not really a change. It's just allowing the Bunker to intervene if something clear has been missed. To be honest, I don't see the purpose of even having the referees send anything up to the bunker if it's all reviewed.

Forwards only in scrums - Absolute trash. So unless we have players wear something to indicate they are a forward, we are now having referees and touch judges having to remember team lists, and remember who interchanged for who.

In addition to this, it also removes an additional tactic from the game. If the feeding team is packed with backs, then the defence can use a size advantage to push. Penrith can now no longer have Kikau out of the scrum and used as a decoy to suck in defenders. Why are we removing tactics from the game.

If you want to make scrums more competitive, make sure the half feeds the ball between the two props legs - I'm not talking right in the middle of the scrum, but at least ensure a decent enough contest.

I can't believe they've made this change because Steve Roach had a whinge.

 

[Chimp]

. So unless we have players wear something to indicate they are a forward, we are now having referees and touch judges having to remember team lists, and remember who interchanged for who.

The players already do wear something to indicate that they’re a forward - numbers 8-13.....

 

[Frailty]

The players already do wear something to indicate that they’re a forward - numbers 8-13.....

Except that's where they are named on the Tuesday and it is not uncommon for players to switch positions during the week. Frequently backrowers move into the centres, etc.

 

[Chimp]

Except that's where they are named on the Tuesday and it is not uncommon for players to switch positions during the week. Frequently backrowers move into the centres, etc.

Then maybe to sit alongside this ruling, shirt numbers on game day should always be 1-17, and the designated forwards have to wear 8-17 - even if let’s say 1 of those players actually starts the game in the centre (but will move into forwards as part of interchange routine).

 

[Saxon]

Bunker looking at tries while a conversion is set up is okay I guess, but if a conversion is taken quickly it could be problematic.

I understand the concept, but shit it'd be a bad look.
Team scores, players return to their half ok the field, kicker lines up...then a minute and a half after the whistle blows, "Oh, wait we try scoring team's stuffed it up. It's actually a 20 metre restart to the other guys".
F-ing amateur hour.

 

[Perth Red]

At least will add some interest into those games.

Maybe we should pick games we think will be a bit boring thoughout the season to try out whacky rules, you know to add some interest?

 

[Marshall_magic]

I understand the concept, but shit it'd be a bad look.
Team scores, players return to their half ok the field, kicker lines up...then a minute and a half after the whistle blows, "Oh, wait we try scoring team's stuffed it up. It's actually a 20 metre restart to the other guys".
F-ing amateur hour.

Just let the bunker rule on grounding and in/out calls. Anything else the defending team needs to use a challenge. I just boggles my mind that we complain about refs getting decisions wrong and we go out of our way to make it harder for them

 

[Perth Red]

Just let the bunker rule on grounding and in/out calls. Anything else the defending team needs to use a challenge. I just boggles my mind that we complain about refs getting decisions wrong and we go out of our way to make it harder for them

Far too logical! One thing the refs challenge has done is take away some of the criticism of the ref and put the onus back on the capt. This would do same I feel. It would take a lot of pressure off the ref and the bunker and stop TV dissecting every tiny detail in the lead up to a try. Give the capts one call each half to start and see how it goes. If it has to go up to 2 so be it.

At moment poor ref knows every try call is going to get forensically reviewed so feels obliged to go up to VR for the most simple of try decisions.

 

[Chimp]

I understand the concept, but shit it'd be a bad look.
Team scores, players return to their half ok the field, kicker lines up...then a minute and a half after the whistle blows, "Oh, wait we try scoring team's stuffed it up. It's actually a 20 metre restart to the other guys".
F-ing amateur hour.

For me, this is exactly why the bunker should only be able to look at it in full speed without super zoom, maybe even restrict it to just 2 replays - if they can’t spot anything obvious, try stands.

 

[Marshall_magic]

Far too logical! One thing the refs challenge has done is take away some of the criticism of the ref and put the onus back on the capt. This would do same I feel. It would take a lot of pressure off the ref and the bunker and stop TV dissecting every tiny detail in the lead up to a try. Give the capts one call each half to start and see how it goes. If it has to go up to 2 so be it.

At moment poor ref knows every try call is going to get forensically reviewed so feels obliged to go up to VR for the most simple of try decisions.

The challenge has given the refs an out, it means now coaches can’t bleat about certain decisions in pressers. When the bunker is inevitably canned I can see Joey, Gus and all the other major critics of the bunker complaining that certain mistakes could be avoided if the decisions are renewed.

 

[Mr Spock!]

So are we going to have the absurd situation of teams racing to get conversions or holding conversions up? Having the try overturned when the kicker is in his kicking stride is a joke.

The try is either awarded or not.

Why not just make it part of the captains challenge instead of the farce proposed?