Worst rules in Rugby League.

[LineBall]

There are two I’d nominate. Both were evident in the Grand Final.

1. Ball hitting the referee (trainer) results in a scrum to the attacking team.

Should be changed so that the tackle is replayed. So as in the example tonight, Roosters play the ball again and it’s still the last tackle.

2. Charge down results in 6 again.

This rewards a poor kick and penalises the effort from the defence. Tackle count shouldn’t be restarted on any chargedown.

 

[Danish]

I’d actually make it so that if it hits your trainer, you lose the ball

 

[LineBall]

I’d actually make it so that if it hits your trainer, you lose the ball

Maybe. In reality the trainers shouldn’t be on the field anywhere near as much as they are anyway. Anything would be better than the current rule.

 

[Mr Spock!]

There are two I’d nominate. Both were evident in the Grand Final.

1. Ball hitting the referee (trainer) results in a scrum to the attacking team.

Should be changed so that the tackle is replayed. So as in the example tonight, Roosters play the ball again and it’s still the last tackle.

2. Charge down results in 6 again.

This rewards a poor kick and penalises the effort from the defence. Tackle count shouldn’t be restarted on any chargedown.

1. nah, should be penalty against the trainers team. Its up to the trainer not to interfere with play. Get the merkins out of there.

 

[Mr Spock!]

2 refs is a joke.

 

[LineBall]

1. nah, should be penalty against the trainers team. Its up to the trainer not to interfere with play. Get the merkins out of there.

That’s obviously my feelings too. My proposed changes assume the issue with trainers on the field has already been rectified, and as such, the chance of them actually being hit by the ball should be very, very small. A penalty against a team for that would seem a little harsh.

 

[Mr Spock!]

That’s obviously my feelings too. My proposed changes assume the issue with trainers on the field has already been rectified, and as such, the chance of them actually being hit by the ball should be very, very small. A penalty against a team for that would seem a little harsh.

Nope...should still be a penalty. In AFL its a free kick.

 

[LineBall]

Nope...should still be a penalty. In AFL its a free kick.

Just imagine a trainer is attending a player in the backfield, 40 metres away, with his back to the play. The other team kicks the ball downfield and it just touches the trainer and has no real impact on either the defence or attacking teams contesting the ball. Wouldn’t you agree that a penalty for this would be a bit extreme? Just as giving the attacking team a scrum feed seems ridiculous?

 

[JamesBrandy]

I've been saying for a few years the 7 tackle restart is crap.

 

[LineBall]

I've been saying for a few years the 7 tackle restart is crap.

Yep. Add it to the list.

 

[Mr Spock!]

Just imagine a trainer is attending a player in the backfield, 40 metres away, with his back to the play. The other team kicks the ball downfield and it just touches the trainer and has no real impact on either the defence or attacking teams contesting the ball. Wouldn’t you agree that a penalty for this would be a bit extreme? Just as giving the attacking team a scrum feed seems ridiculous?

A penalty is better than replaying the set however maybe play on if it doesnt disadvantage the nontrainers team.

So on tonights scenario trainer interfered with play to the disadvantage of raiders. Penalty Raiders.

Get off the field, merkins.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

The ball touching the end zone should result in a 7 tackle set, not when the ball touches the dead ball line.

 

[Knight Vision]

• the interchange - needs to be reduced, bring back the little men to the game.
• No punch rule is idiotic - it's footy ffs
• 1 refs - 2 refs is confusing and not needed
• 3rd party deals - theyre bullshit and we all know it
• no rake back from the marker- Benny Elias was a genius at it
• trainers on the field - f**k them off

 

[TheVelourFog]

• No punch rule is idiotic - it's footy ffs

sounds like you might be more interested in boxing than rugby league

 

[gitano]

Nope...should still be a penalty. In AFL its a free kick.

Very different sport and result from that, cob

 

[siv]

Firstly this old 1908 rule needs a update

It has happened before and a similar outcry

Change should be

Defensive team should get the scrum feed as the loose head advantage doesn't apply in the modern game

If it occurs on the 5th tackle - it's a changeover

If the trainer deliberately tries to interfere with play - agree that a penalty should result and trainer banned for 2 years

Also agree chargedowns ball on the rise should not be 6 to go - Never used to be

 

[mistertaylor]

Just imagine a trainer is attending a player in the backfield, 40 metres away, with his back to the play. The other team kicks the ball downfield and it just touches the trainer and has no real impact on either the defence or attacking teams contesting the ball. Wouldn’t you agree that a penalty for this would be a bit extreme? Just as giving the attacking team a scrum feed seems ridiculous?

What was the trainer doing on the field in the 3rd minute of the game? No one was injured, cramping or bleeding from the head at that stage, so there is absolutely no reason for a trainer to be onfield.

 

[LineBall]

What was the trainer doing on the field in the 3rd minute of the game? No one was injured, cramping or bleeding from the head at that stage, so there is absolutely no reason for a trainer to be onfield.

Absolutely agree. It’s been a problem for years and now it’s bitten the NRL on its arse in the biggest game of the year. What will be worse is that they won’t deal with it during the off-season.

 

[Mr Spock!]

While they're at it, change the interference by a ref or spectator to something else. (replay last tackle)

Scrums aren't 50:50 anymore.

Interference by trainers should be a straight out penalty.

 

[Knight Vision]

sounds like you might be more interested in boxing than rugby league

More interested in seeing once again the fire and brimstone that was once in the game. It's an aggressive sport and that's the reason it was so popular.

Why do you think among the most watched highlights reels are the biff ? because people dont like it, because they enjoy boxing instead ? Why was the biff almost always used to advertise the game ? Because marketers dont know what theyre doing?

Easily one of the worst decisions in recent times was bean counter Smith's knee jerk reaction to ban the biff. He had a brilliant product and decided to change it. Now SOO is simply and NRL game with different colored jerseys. RL will die a slow death, eventually becoming touch football.