Rule changes you would like to see in 2010

[Andrew McAwesome]

Can you imagine how much that would be exploited though, every tackle the player would claim to have not heard it.

It would turn into a free for all, why not chance it.

Because every time the play gets called back, it allows the defensive line to reset. I don't think it would be exploited that much - do you think an attacking team will benefit from slowing down the play-the-ball?

 

[Jankuloski]

Because there is always a chance that the ref lets him to run on... But I think it's too much for them to loose the ball as well.

 

[Paulie Jay]

With penalties having such a bearing on the momentum (and sometimes outcome) of games, how about this:

If the team receiving the penalty elects to kick for touch, then the tackle count is not restarted. So if they were awarded the penalty on tackle 2, they restart their set on tackle 2 downfield.

If the team receiving the penalty elects for a quick tap, then the tackle count is restarted.

This would help balance out the inequality between penalties given on the 5th tackle, and those earlier on in the set. With this new rule, a team given a penalty on tackle 5 is basically forced to take another set of 6 tackles, without the added benefit of free metres. With two refs, it should be easier to allow quick taps also, with one keeping an eye on which players are back the 10 metres from the restart.

I think this idea has some merit. Even though I don't support making penalties "softer" (the fear of the big stick is usually what keeps players in line), this seems like a good compromise.

 

[Gaba]

Reason for a penalty is to try to stop teams deliberate fouling the other team, this new set of 6 plays, only advantage the team who does the foul, not the team in the reciept of a penalty

The league should never look at soften the penalty, in fact it should toughen the penalty rule up


1st penalty give the team a warning players next breach 5 minutes in the bin, then 10 minutes for the 3rd, 20mins for the 4th and 5th penalty player/s sent off

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

- Playing on after being called held. This shouldn't be a penalty to the defensive team. I would like to see it be time off, go back and play the ball. A carrier shouldn't be penalised if the tackler falls off him and he doesn't hear the ref calls held

- 'No separation'. Garbage rule. The words 'reasonable control' should be inserted into that rule. Case in point - Dallas Johnson's try in the preliminary final. If it happens on halfway and it's a knock on, it shouldn't be a try when it happens in the ingoal.

- 'Torso try'. Garbage. Dallas Johnson again, this time his Origin 3 try. If you can't knock the ball on with part of your body, you shouldn't be able to use it to score a try.


What are some of yours?

1. Completely agree, its pretty much the gayest penalty there is.

2/3. The ole different interpretations scenerio will play in, damned if they do, damned if they dont. At the very least it should only be allowed to be grounded with a hand. Not a f**king torso!

 

[gronkathon]

Mandatory 1 week suspension for every two games Jason Ryles plays

 

[LineBall]

Reason for a penalty is to try to stop teams deliberate fouling the other team, this new set of 6 plays, only advantage the team who does the foul, not the team in the reciept of a penalty

The league should never look at soften the penalty, in fact it should toughen the penalty rule up


1st penalty give the team a warning players next breach 5 minutes in the bin, then 10 minutes for the 3rd, 20mins for the 4th and 5th penalty player/s sent off

How does the team who commits the foul get any advantage by giving the other team another set of 6 tackles?

If you're going to start binning players off after the second penalty, you're not going to see anything that resembles rugby league anymore. People generally prefer to see 13 players on each team, unless of course there is a serious incident that warrants a send off.

 

[NAS]

1) The video referee referral should be taken out of the hands of the on field official. Instead a referral system like in the cricket should be used where each team gets two incorrect referrals per game. The cricket this summer has been greatly enhanced, without really damaging the game with constant stoppages. The refs need to start being accountable. The video ref gets 2 normal motion replays and two slow motion replays to make up his mind....if he can't, then the refs original decision stands and we get on with the game!!!

2) Reduce the interchange to 6, with the addition of two substitutes (from a list of six or so-can work now that NSW cup is played mid week), who can come on for a player who gets injured.....One thing that really gripes me is when a team loses because they finish with four game ending injuries, or when teams try to bring back a player who shouldn't continue because they are down on troops.....this approach will appease the doctors and health concerns, whilst at the same time, allow for the return of the quick little guy!!!

3) I agree with everyone on the whole benefit of the doubt issue....If there's reasonable doubt, it shouldn't be a try.

4) I am a massive fan of golden point.....I think it's great!!! But I do like the idea of making all penalties in Golden Point differential (you can't take a kick at goal), except for cases involving professional fouls.......

 

[Bastard Squad]

Get the trainers off the field, I'm sick of seeing them.

Trainers can only run on field when there is a time off signal by a ref.
Trainers can be red-carded by the ref for staying on too long
Players needing attention must move to the side-line or in goal to reach a trainer during play. This is for both attack and defence.
If a player needs a drink of water wait for a time-off or move to the side-line you wimp.

 

[Danish]

I'd just like to say how glad I am that no one here has any sway setting the rules of our game.

* According to this thread players running off the mark shouldn't be penalised (they didn't hear the ref!), but walking off the mark should (they are taking the markers out of the game!).
* A player jumping on a loose ball in the ingoal with his chest shouldn't be awarded a try, but a player tackled 1m out, then reaching out and putting it on the line should.
* The tackling system for dominant/surrender should be simplified to speed up the game, but players should be allowed to hold down as much as they want and only receive a restarted tackle count.
* You shouldn't be allowed to win in extra time by 1 point, but in regular time its ok.


Plenty of other gems just like those too.

I saw we ban all rule changes from here on in. Every single rule change made in the past decade has been an absolute farce, with fans, coaches and players alike pleading for a change to be made, then screaming blue murder when it predictably turns out to be a rubbish rule.

Roll it back to the first year of the NRL's rules and f**king well leave them alone. I'd like to know that in 40 years time when I'm watching league with my grandson I won't be looking at a completely different game to what I am watching now.

 

[TiggaPlease]

* You shouldn't be allowed to win in extra time by 1 point, but in regular time its ok.

Of course it is.

If we are going to have extra time for draws (which i personally dont think we should) shouldn't it be a spectacle rather than a shoot out?

If someone slots a field goal in a drawn game with 5 mins to go the game doesn't automatically end, so why should it in extra time?

Either leave the golden point and make it 3 points for a win, 1 for a golden point loss or draw and 2 for a golden point win OR make it 5 minutes extra time each way with no first to score wins rule in place.

 

[Gaba]

How does the team who commits the foul get any advantage by giving the other team another set of 6 tackles?

If you're going to start binning players off after the second penalty, you're not going to see anything that resembles rugby league anymore. People generally prefer to see 13 players on each team, unless of course there is a serious incident that warrants a send off.

For example a team can deliberate slow down the play from the attacking team, and dont be penaltise metres for it, for example the attacking team has the ball 20 metres from thier own goalline, the defensive team can deliberately be offside in knowing they are giving away set of 6 instead of 30-40 metres down field,so of cause they are going to risk in giving repeats sets of 6 and there is more chance of the team wiht the ball will make a mistake. Then risking a 30-40m easy gain the team who was given the penalty

Teams will learn not to give away too many penaltys the game will be better ,

thats the problem if the game listens to the people too much , that will do more damage to the game. The game will be more slower and predictable

 

[Eion]

I saw we ban all rule changes from here on in. Every single rule change made in the past decade has been an absolute farce, with fans, coaches and players alike pleading for a change to be made, then screaming blue murder when it predictably turns out to be a rubbish rule.

One of the best things about league has been it's ability to adapt and try new things. If nothing changed we'd be watching international rugby and wouldn't that suck...

Obviously not every decision is going to work out (the strip rule was my personal favourite - but they responded to that and changed back). FTR I like golden point and I like the 40/20 as 2 'recent' examples.

 

[Danish]

40/20 is the only decent rule to be introduced in the last 20 years. Everything else has been a detriment to the game, whether by being a direct farce (the stripping rule, "no separation" rule) or by giving the ref too much to worry about and learn leading to either too many penalties or bad decisions (the whole play the ball area, basically).

League fans are about the sorriest bunch of whingers when it comes to referees and it is largely because of the constant chopping and changing to how the game is officiated. I watch plenty of EPL and there seems to be next to no talk of rules or referees, if any at all. Probably because the rules of soccer are so set in stone everyone understands what a ref was thinking when awarding a free kick.

 

[LineBall]

For example a team can deliberate slow down the play from the attacking team, and dont be penaltise metres for it, for example the attacking team has the ball 20 metres from thier own goalline, the defensive team can deliberately be offside in knowing they are giving away set of 6 instead of 30-40 metres down field,so of cause they are going to risk in giving repeats sets of 6 and there is more chance of the team wiht the ball will make a mistake. Then risking a 30-40m easy gain the team who was given the penalty

Teams will learn not to give away too many penaltys the game will be better ,

thats the problem if the game listens to the people too much , that will do more damage to the game. The game will be more slower and predictable

Your example fails to take into account what tackle the penalty is given on. If, as you suggest, the defending team is deliberately slowing down the play the ball, and the penalty happens to be given on the second tackle, I'm sure the attacking team would elect to kick for touch and continue play downfield starting again on tackle number 2.

Even if it was given on tackle 5, the attacking team could still elect to kick for touch, then restart on tackle 5 and kick again for even better field position.

 

[Andrew McAwesome]

I watch plenty of EPL and there seems to be next to no talk of rules or referees, if any at all. Probably because the rules of soccer are so set in stone everyone understands what a ref was thinking when awarding a free kick.

Followed by 5 minutes of protests if the free kick is within about 40 metres of either goal.

 

[Chachi]

I think it's pretty rude to lose a game in golden point and get nothing.

If you can match a team for 80 minutes, you should get something. 1 point if you lose in extra time, and 2 if you win.

Yeah, I like the idea of 4 points for a regulation win, 3 for an extra time win, 1 for an extra time loss and 2 for a draw.

You can't have a system where extra time games are awarded more premiership points than a normal game. It doesn't work.

 

[SEAT 1A]

The penalty for not standing straight at the play the ball needs to be looked at. There are to many bullsh** penalties given on that one.

Also, I would think to to see the ref's call the numbers of the players not thier names and show a bit more respect for the players. Archer and Suttor? sh** me by the may they carry on.

I would also like to see less of when the ref calls a player out of the play. It's ok to advise a player to stay out of the play after a bomb or if the dummy half goes for a run from dummy half

 

[hunters]

see the ref's call the numbers of the players not thier names and show a bit more respect for the players.

I think it is a bit more respectful calling someone by their actual name rather than "hey, number four" and is possibly why they started doing it. Never heard a player complain about it so it's good enough for me.

 

[Skeletor]

Striking in the play the ball and tap ahead when there is no marker. Not sure why these rules were abolished in the first place.

^This.

• Coaches challenge. No video referee at all, but the coaches are issued 3 coaches challenges a half. They do not carry over if you don't use all of them in the first half, only 3.

Not this. I've seen this in the NFL and I much prefer the referee referral system. Seen many occasions where a mistake has been made and a coach can't challenge it because he's out of challenges.

My suggestions:
-A designated player slot a/k/a a Larry Bird rule. That is where one player per team can be compensated at any level the club and player deem worthy, that players salary will not count towards the cap. Each team has 1 designated player spot per year, which is a tradeable asset (see below).

-A trade/draft/Free Agency system.

Similar to American sports. none of this poaching a player while he's still on contract with another club for no penalty. No more of certain teams keeping all their juniors under lock and key, buried in reserves when they have 1st Grade ability.

Works like this:
Player under contract with team A, team B wants him:
Team B talks to team A, works out what in players/draft picks team A wants, gives them up and gets the player.

While a player is between the ages of 18-24 he's a restricted free agent, which means if a player of those ages is out of contract and team B wants him, they make an offer. Team A can match that offer, or lose the player to team b and gain draft picks.

Over 24 he's an unrestricted free agent, and then can move between clubs when out of contract with no compensation requirement.

All players at age 18 are draft eligible, draft order is a reverse of last season's ladder.