2022 NRL Rule changes

[Mark from Brisbane]

The rules!!

Just another euphemism for,

“ how the referee decides the game”.

I yearn for the time that two teams came out to play a game and you hardly know the referee is there, they can ( and do ) do this during SOO but no we get the whole “ let’s make it entertainment for the poor bored Millenials and Gen X’s whose concentration spans could be compared with a Gnat !!

You mark my words , it’ll be the referee that decides most games this season and most games will effectively be over after 20 minutes.

The strong teams will obliterate the weaker teams and the gap between the haves and the have nots will continue to widen.

Rant over!!

 

[Will on the hill]

The rules!!

Just another euphemism for,

“ how the referee decides the game”.

I yearn for the time that two teams came out to play a game and you hardly know the referee is there, they can ( and do ) do this during SOO but no we get the whole “ let’s make it entertainment for the poor bored Millenials and Gen X’s whose concentration spans could be compared with a Gnat !!

You mark my words , it’ll be the referee that decides most games this season and most games will effectively be over after 20 minutes.

The strong teams will obliterate the weaker teams and the gap between the haves and the have nots will continue to widen.

Rant over!!

To play diablo avocado, it's probably always been that way especially when there was contested scrums. It's just become more obvious with every game on TV, multiple camera angles and ever increasing analysis of every play. If the strong teams are beating weak teams doesn't that mean the refs aren't influencing the result?

 

[47MVEagle]

To play diablo avocado, it's probably always been that way especially when there was contested scrums. It's just become more obvious with every game on TV, multiple camera angles and ever increasing analysis of every play. If the strong teams are beating weak teams doesn't that mean the refs aren't influencing the result?

"Diablo Avocado" hahaha love it

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

"Diablo Avocado" hahaha love it

Must say that’s a newie for me !!

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

To play diablo avocado, it's probably always been that way especially when there was contested scrums. It's just become more obvious with every game on TV, multiple camera angles and ever increasing analysis of every play. If the strong teams are beating weak teams doesn't that mean the refs aren't influencing the result?

I get that the strong teams have always beaten the weak teams but you gotta say the gulf between strong and weak is getting wider , and these new rules have allowed the strong not just to dominate but to absolutely blow them off the park !!

 

[Eagle 1]

I get that the strong teams have always beaten the weak teams but you gotta say the gulf between strong and weak is getting wider , and these new rules have allowed the strong not just to dominate but to absolutely blow them off the park !!

yeah...just like Manly/TTurbo did for most of last season. Can't really see things changing to much from last year. Agree on your comment that it could be all over in 20min.

 

[maxta]

Not so sure it's bad at all - the rule change means there will be a stop in play, which will allow frazzled defence on the backfoot to regroup.....I think that constant flow and defending 5 x set restarts, makes it "non stop"tackling and really juices the defence and can turn a game and almost burst any chance of recovery....in fact I have a strong feeling many of the better teams would have preferred the continued "Roll on effect" and momentum, to the point teams like Melbourne, City and Manly, will attempt quick taps to just this rather than opt for the touch finder.
Also a team who has been under the pump, can now take that slow restart and kick for touch grabbing 30 seconds of oxygen....slowing it down.
I feel this rule will actually favour the weaker sides, but agree the difference between best and worst is widening and blow outs will again be common 2022.

 

[Dan]

any infringement inside the attacking teams 40 should be a penalty not just ruck and 10m, just blanket anything. Gives the team in possession more advantage and acts as a deterrent.

Actually should be applied inside the defending teams 20m as well to help decide some matches and give some tactical decision making rather than just keep trying to score a try

 

[Under the Sticks]

@Will on the hill.

 

[Brissie Kid]

So it will be ok to kick for goal from one of these penalties?

So if a play the ball is just inside the 40m and the opponents are penalised, does mean the penalty is given near enough to the half way line? So if a team needs the 2 points, they can kick for goal from there? But same team can't kick for goal for the same offence if it happens 10m out from the try line?

 

[Tragic Eagle]

Good change but more is required. The repeat sets should be restricted to penalties conceded when defending in your own red zone. I understood the purpose of the rule was to overcome sides intentionally conceding penalties on their line. Rolling sides down the field with repeat sets has changed the fabric of the game and resulted in sides getting gassed in defence early and blow out scores.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Good change but more is required. The repeat sets should be restricted to penalties conceded when defending in your own red zone. I understood the purpose of the rule was to overcome sides intentionally conceding penalties on their line. Rolling sides down the field with repeat sets has changed the fabric of the game and resulted in sides getting gassed in defence early and blow out scores.

Yep , and I hate it.

Honestly they could fix this easy.

First time , penalty & warning.

Second time , 10 minute sin bin.

Third time , 10 minute sin bin

Fourth time , sent from the field.

One match would fix it , the Roosters , two in the bin and then Tedesco gets sent !!

Only would happen once.

 

[Ranga]

Yep , and I hate it.

Honestly they could fix this easy.

First time , penalty & warning.

Second time , 10 minute sin bin.

Third time , 10 minute sin bin

Fourth time , sent from the field.

One match would fix it , the Roosters , two in the bin and then Tedesco gets sent !!

Only would happen once.

I agree, Mark. I have thought something like the 'foul' system in basketball would suit the 6-again rule. You'd probably need more than one warning though - I don't have a problem with teams committing tactical penalties - but the system would be effective and capable of being consistently applied by the ref.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

I agree, Mark. I have thought something like the 'foul' system in basketball would suit the 6-again rule. You'd probably need more than one warning though - I don't have a problem with teams committing tactical penalties - but the system would be effective and capable of being consistently applied by the ref.

Yeah my post wasn’t exactly how it should be but the point is , you start sending players to the bin and that changes everything.

They could have fixed this easily

 

[Ranga]

Yeah my post wasn’t exactly how it should be but the point is , you start sending players to the bin and that changes everything.

They could have fixed this easily

The sin bin was always the solution to the issue…

 

[mave]

Please just stop changing the rules every 5 minutes.

It does more harm than good.

 

[47MVEagle]

Wasnt the 6 again rule introduced specifically because teams were deliberately slowing down the ruck when defending their red zone so they would only give away a penalty (& therefore only 2 points) anyway?

So now they've reversed it & we'll see teams going back to deliberately giving away penalties in their red zone in order to only have 2 points instead of a potential 6 scored against them.

I agree with @Mark from Brisbane - the sinbin needs to be used & it will very quickly eliminate deliberate slowing down of the ruck inside the red zone.

 

[StuBoot]

It’s a missed opportunity for one of the rules that pisses me off though. I would love for them to change the 7 tackle 20m set restart for attacking kicks that go dead or knock-ons over the try line. It is such a disproportionate punishment to the actual offence. If it was up to me, only kicks that go dead from >30m out should be punished by the 7 tackle 20m set restart.

I'm with you @Ranga, it's one of my bugbears/pet hates, call it what you will.

A team that has got themselves into an attacking position can lose that dominance by the barest of margins, one of those rules that was to stop the cynical kick from 40m out that has now skewed the other way.

We are seeing lots more last tackle plays taking the tackle close to the try line rather than a speculative kick in case it goes dead, teams are being coached to do it. I seem to recall DCE ( on here) and other teams' playmakers copping it in commentary for failing to kick on the last when it reality if it's not on why risk giving away an 20 metres and an extra tackle.

Also, I've seen so many times the attacking team knocks it on in the field of play but the ball goes dead in goal called a 7 tackle restart where the initial mistake was in the field of play so why not a scrum where the knock on happened?

 

[Jerry1]

I think the change to the 6 again rule is sensible.

The rule change I am a bit iffy about is the change to the free interchange for foul play. Now a player has to be put in the bin or sent off for the injured player’s team to get a free interchange. I think I understand the rationale, but there is no way the refs will be consistent in their application as to what a sin-bin or send off is. While it was annoying seeing the ref put everything and anything in report, thereby awarding a free interchange, at least they were relatively consistent. Not the end of the world though.

It’s a missed opportunity for one of the rules that pisses me off though. I would love for them to change the 7 tackle 20m set restart for attacking kicks that go dead or knock-ons over the try line. It is such a disproportionate punishment to the actual offence. If it was up to me, only kicks that go dead from >30m out should be punished by the 7 tackle 20m set restart.

The same ref is not consistent so we have no hope of the rule being applied as such. That's why I hated the six again rule. It had no accountability & could be applied as seen fit by the ref without any real justification. At least a penalty is a stoppage in play & can be questioned.

 

[BOZO]

Wasnt the 6 again rule introduced specifically because teams were deliberately slowing down the ruck when defending their red zone so they would only give away a penalty (& therefore only 2 points) anyway?

So now they've reversed it & we'll see teams going back to deliberately giving away penalties in their red zone in order to only have 2 points instead of a potential 6 scored against them.

The moral of the story here is feathered friend ....

What ever the NRL come up with

Salary caps are meant to be broken and Rules are meant to be exploited

Not so by the Perpetrators but by the Innovators