Offseason Rule Change Idea #1

[webbland]

get rid of video ref and let the main referee watch it on the video screen and then make his decision-like us fans do
players actually behind the 10m line not 1 foot on it and standing in front of the mark
all opposing players to ennis and reynolds get one free punch

 

[hunters]

get rid of video ref and let the main referee watch it on the video screen and then make his decision-like us fans do
players actually behind the 10m line not 1 foot on it and standing in front of the mark
all opposing players to ennis and reynolds get one free punch

How the hell do you expect players to stop at one punch?

 

[Eels Dude]

Seems I'm the only person that doesn't agree with this. Don't know why, in this one instance, you would not restart the count when the defending team plays at the ball when every other instance of the defending team playing at the ball does restart it.

Would also further muddy the waters between a charge down and playing at the ball, especially on chip kicks.

No knock on is enough of an advantage for me.

I agree with you. To me if you attempt a charge down there should be an element of risk involved for the attacking side if it doesn't come off. Otherwise they'd attempt it every set and we'd see scrappy ends to every set of six.

 

[Eels Dude]

5. That's absurd. How many incidents have been placed on report and found to warrant no action?

Add to that teams already get the advantage of a free interchange. A lot of the time the player being put on report have just given a slightly head high tackle that only warrants a penalty, but because the player on the receiving end is injured the refs feel pressured to put the offender on report simply so the other side can get their 2 free interchanges.

 

[lockyno1]

Do you honestly think that teams wouldn't abuse this rule? With 15 minutes to go, it's highly likely that players will go down injured. This way the fresh player can make an impact. I think this rule would negatively effect the game.

Independent doctor would have to rule that player out and that player would miss the next week mandatory. Therefore you would only do it under serious circumstances

 

[lockyno1]

4. There's already 4 substitutes sitting on the bench. There's no need to drag another guy around the place.
5. That's absurd. How many incidents have been placed on report and found to warrant no action?

Teams down to 3 interchanges are at a disadvantage, why not have an 18th man, worst comes to worst, he sits there for 80 minutes. As for the report...report the right offences then!

 

[webbland]

How the hell do you expect players to stop at one punch?

them the rules mate

 

[hunters]

Teams down to 3 interchanges are at a disadvantage, why not have an 18th man, worst comes to worst, he sits there for 80 minutes. As for the report...report the right offences then!

Oh of course, why didn't I think of that. It's really that easy. :lol:

I think we should have an extra 17 players travel with the team, you know, in case there is more than one injury.