Rule Changes/Concepts

[Third Bugler]

My rule changes would be get rid of dominant and surrender tackles. Let the refs call get off him and play it. Would allow for much faster play the balls which leads to better spectacle games.

Q: Why is it that refs need to distinguish between lawful tackles?
A: To allow tacklers in a 'dominant' tackle to lawfully slow down the play-the-ball (PTB).

Q: Why is it important for defender to wish to slow down the PTB?
A: For the same reason defenders flop, wrestle, grab legs, and come in four-strong when two or three could certainly execute an effective tackle.

Q: So what is this reason?
A: The defending team needs to retire 10 metres for the PTB. The attacking team do not.

Q: Was it always so?
A: It was not. Despite several changes in the distances teams must retire in respect of the PTB, both teams had to retire the same distance until relatively recently.

Q: What was the PTB like when both teams had to retire the same distance?
A: Quick. An attempt by a defender to deliberately slow the PTB was not usually tolerated.

Q: But did defenders keep trying it on in the hope the ref would tire of blowing penalties?
A: Rarely. There was not a lot of incentive to try to slow the PTB at every tackle in any case, because attacking sides could and did get penalised for players not retiring the necessary distance.

Q: What rule change might this point to?
A: Whaddya reckon....

 

[Perth Red]

Biggest change needed for me is to stop the VR intervening on foul play. It is leading to diving of soccer'esq proportions and, whilst a soccer fan like Tonearm probably loves to see players diving like fairies, for us RL fans it has never been part of our game and the motivation for staying down needs to be removed.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

Why you calling me out you piece of shit?

 

[Parra]

Q: What was the PTB like when both teams had to retire the same distance?
A: Quick. An attempt by a defender to deliberately slow the PTB was not usually tolerated.

True Answer - still a mess. Which led to rule changes to address the mess. Which has led us to where we are today.

Seems we can't accept a referees subjective judgement on a lot of issues, but tolerate the situation where the same ref can nominate a tackle as dominant, surrender or normal. Based on nothing.

 

[Perth Red]

Why you calling me out you piece of shit?

clue, the pansies you have in soccer shirts in your sig?:crazy:

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

So basically you have a sandy vagina, such a pathetic human being

 

[snogard6]

Stop the clock when try scored till kick off and whenever ball is out of play

 

[bondy064]

I would do something to speed up the rucks a little something like:
-if there is defenders don't clear the ruck the ref can call the markers offside, this will stop players lying around the play the ball and interferring with the dummy half.
-every player who is involved in the completion of a tackle must stand as a marker. If you are getting 4-5 defenders in a tackle it will make you vulnerable out wide to a shift. It also will encourage more creative attacking play as dummy half running will be nullified by the extra markers.

Haven't read all but like this idea. Also would introduce if ball kicked over dead ball line it comes back to where the ball was kicked for a tap for other team. 5 min sin bin sounds good too.

 

[afinalsin666]

Need to speed up the play the ball a bit.

5 seconds - fine.
6-8 seconds - tackle does not count.
8+ seconds - penalty.

So say team a is running the ball on 3rd tackle, and team b lies on the player for 7 seconds, team a gets up and plays the ball, but it is still the third. We would see a stop to wrestling within weeks. Also has some middle ground between nothing and penalty, because at the moment, the lines are extremely blurred.

Now i, personally love the wrestle in the game, but this is aimed at the vast majority who don't.

 

[simmo1]

Charge downs from kicks shouldn't restart the tackle count.

I also liked the one about the Union style quick throw ins.