Another rule change: Kicks in gen play.

[eaglebuzz]

I wonder how many other major sporting competitions have an Innovation Commitee?

I'm not against sports innovating, but I'd rather they put their innovation efforts into things like technology to help refs make the right calls (things like hawkeye for example) rather than constantly effing around with the rules.

 

[Snake]

The 7 tackle is a problem generally. It should only be for kicks that go dead from >20m out.

Think about this. A winger dives for a try in the corner but loses the ball forward and the ball goes dead. 20m restart and 7 tackle set follow.

however, if a fullback fields a grubber 1m out from their line in the corner of the field and gets hit high, they might advance 15m down field with the kick for touch and only get a 6 tackle set.

How can the former scenario result in a harsher punishment than the latter? It’s crazy in my mind.

Years ago, Jamie Soward was deliberately putting his clearing kicks dead to nullify the likes of Slater from returning the ball against a staggered line. So are you saying 7 tackles for kicks that go dead from outside the 20m (aka clearning kicks) or 7 tackles for the attacking kicks that go wrong?

I tend to think clearing kicks should result in 7 tackles but the little grubbers that roll dead probably don't need a 7 tackle restart. Just my opinion.

 

[Ranga]

Years ago, Jamie Soward was deliberately putting his clearing kicks dead to nullify the likes of Slater from returning the ball against a staggered line. So are you saying 7 tackles for kicks that go dead from outside the 20m (aka clearning kicks) or 7 tackles for the attacking kicks that go wrong?

I tend to think clearing kicks should result in 7 tackles but the little grubbers that roll dead probably don't need a 7 tackle restart. Just my opinion.

We are aligned. Attacking kicks shouldn’t be punished.

 

[Blake]

I feel like almost every game will have a kick for touch around the 20th and 60th minute as a non-spoken mutual agreement between the teams to give the players a bit of a rest.
Of all the issues plaguing our game, this doesnt rate overly high on my agenda.

 

[mave]

Just leave the rules alone for 5 minutes for ****s sake, and let the game catch up to itself.

 

[Snake]

We are aligned. Attacking kicks shouldn’t be punished.

It makes sense. If you are good enough to be in an attacking position (you've earned that field position), you should not be punished so harshly for a kick that is very difficult to execute. It's punishment enough that the kick goes dead and the opposition get the ball. 7 tackle sets are supposed to punish deliberately negative and spoiling tactics, not the 50/50 close calls.

 

[Snake]

I feel like almost every game will have a kick for touch around the 20th and 60th minute as a non-spoken mutual agreement between the teams to give the players a bit of a rest.
Of all the issues plaguing our game, this doesnt rate overly high on my agenda.

not to mention it's not every really a breather anymore because they abolished the scrum so I have no idea what they think they are fixing.

 

[Ranga]

I’m like others - leave the rules alone. But if they could come up with something that would incentivise teams to go for short drop outs or kick offs so that more ball is contested, I’d be open to that.

 

[rj90]

$hit idea.

So because the fans gave a 'ringing endorsement' of the new 6 again rule, the NRL suddenly thinks that's what fans want? Making the game quicker doesn't always make it more entertaining.

If we could leave the rules alone for 1 season, that'd be great.

Speedy six-again tempo gets most important approval of all - the fans

The modern game is played at such a ferocious pace that only the elite athletes will survive and thrive, and the footy served up in the first 24 rounds has been brilliant, breath-taking and brutal all at once.

www.nrl.com

 

[47MVEagle]

I guess we're going to see a huge reduction in kicks in our games now.

 

[winnyason]

Enough is enough player strike

 

[Ranga]

$hit idea.

So because the fans gave a 'ringing endorsement' of the new 6 again rule, the NRL suddenly thinks that's what fans want? Making the game quicker doesn't always make it more entertaining.

If we could leave the rules alone for 1 season, that'd be great.

Speedy six-again tempo gets most important approval of all - the fans

The modern game is played at such a ferocious pace that only the elite athletes will survive and thrive, and the footy served up in the first 24 rounds has been brilliant, breath-taking and brutal all at once.

www.nrl.com

Interesting article. Fans believe the speed of the game is 'about right', therefore the 6 again rule is justified. So the ends justify the means.

I wonder if the poll response would be negative if the question was, "Do you like the 6 again rule?".

 

[sheridanstand78]

Dumb idea, the game is fast enough! The touch finder gives teams a much needed breather.

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

Enough already. What perceived shortcoming is this even addressing? Do they never want stoppages in play? The game is already fast enough - some might argue much too fast - and now Junior wants to pipe up again to justify his employment. He can **** off.

 

[Waz13]

this is a horrible horrible horrible idea.
Taking away all ball and game management out of it. Its enough that we have removed some scrums. This rule is just horrible, please don't adopt it

Couldn’t agree more. What a ridiculous idea. Seriously is Pearce KPIs solely based around putting stupid ideas out there? The game already resembles touch footy with try scoring moments becoming less and less exciting. Why try make it faster and more fatiguing. Idiots!

 

[globaleagle]

The double talk flip flop muddle headed comments pearce gives in this article would be funny if he didn't actually hold a role in the game.

Pearce: Tweak to kicks for touch only rule change being considered

ARLC innovation committee chairman Wayne Pearce believes recent rule changes have improved the game but it is now time for a period of consolidation.

www.nrl.com

we've had so many rule changes we want to consolidate....after changing one more rule.

Teams only kick into touch an ave of 1.25 times a game so it wont change the game much...but we totally wanna change this rule to stop this huuuuge advantage teams aren't actually getting due to not kicking into touch, which they can do un-punished with a 40-20 or a 20-40 but not dead which is essentially just drawing the lines around the footy field so not much is changing unless you still do those 40-20 kicks so no change there but other changes which wont change much because we've had too much change over the last year or so even though I'm in charge of the rule changes...unless that's changed.

 

[Fibro Eagle]

Will result in midfield bombs not kicking to the edges , A team will get punished for an attacking kick for there wingers
Kicking to edges is a tactic of the game , Taking more options out of the game just , What do they want just a continuing of play running back and forth , The game getting closer and closer to touch footy

 

[Brissie Kid]

The rule change set to transform the NRL kicking game forever

The touch-finding kick has been a staple of the game for more than a century, but a mooted rule change could totally overhaul how players put boot to ball.

www.smh.com.au

Kicks which find touch during play will result in the opposition receiving a seven-tackle set under a proposed new rule change that could be trialled as soon as next week.

The NRL’s innovation committee will convene early next week to discuss the impact of recent rule changes and consider whether any other tweaks could further improve the spectacle.

The Herald can reveal the main agenda item will be whether all kicks in general play that find touch - with the exception of the 40-20 and the seldom-used 20-40 - will result in a seven-tackle set to the opposition. The initiative, which could be road-tested for the first time in the round 25 clash between Canterbury and Wests Tigers, has the potential to totally revolutionise the kicking game.
The idea is the brainchild of innovation committee chairman Wayne Pearce, who believes it could result in more ball-in-play time by discouraging the traditional touch-finder kicks that are often used to slow down the game.

“At the moment, when a ball gets kicked into touch, there’s a turnover and the team can have it in the middle of the field or wherever they want to have it,” Pearce told the Herald.

NRL to trial fresh rule change that would revolutionise kicking tactics

‘Leave our game alone’: Star hits out as NRL considers radical kicking rule change

www.foxsports.com.au

The NRL will consider punishing teams who kick into touch by rewarding the opposing team with a seven-tackle set.

ARL commissioner Wayne Pearce, who heads up the game’s innovation committee, said the rule change would be discussed at a meeting next week, with the dead rubber between the Tigers and Bulldogs mooted as one game to trial it in.

(I didn't realise the kick into touch was such a blight on our game - meanwhile players backing into tackles and clutching their necks are going unpunished).

-remember your friend, globaleagle, is just the messenger here!

 

[Brissie Kid]

And after this dumb rule is introduced in Rd 1 the defending winger who would have picked up the kicked ball and got on with it, instead just stands there watching the ball dribble in to touch so his team can get a 7 tackle set. That will speed up the game (not).

And after this dumb rule is introduced in Rd 2 the referees will start awarding 7 tackle sets after a last tackle grubber kick 10m out just beats the chasing winger across the touch line.

 

[jbb/james]

Do you think wayne pearce wants to keep changing rules until the tigpies are competitive

they were the first club to give up on defence about 10 years back and he is trying to level the playing field it seems by making defence irrelevant

next weeks rule will surely be "sack your coach" advance to finals