2010 Rule Changes, Ideas to fix the game

[Charmamba]

because your playing the ball. Your placing the ball "INFRONT" of you then rolling it back. its either a knock on or a play the ball. And by playing the ball your admitting to being tackled.

If the rule as you stated it came in whats not to say when someone does knock on "Oh no i was playing the ball". If you play the ball its a tackle.

I Agree that a player shouldnt be penalised for playing the ball to early. But if you choose to play it, you accept the tackle.

 

[Coxy]

I Agree that a player shouldnt be penalised for playing the ball to early. But if you choose to play it, you accept the tackle.

And this is what I disagree with. You're basically introducing the Touch footy dump and roll.

 

[Charmamba]

See now this is what a Rugby League forum should be about. Opinions being allowed to be discussed without fear of backlash. And AP i hope im not comming off as being a prick to you. Im just enjoying a damn good discussion on RL



And its a fine line on the play the ball. I would hate to see every player stop and play just to avoid a tackle. But i get sick of a player mis judging when to play the ball only to be penalised. Its Safer to play the ball after a defender has "touched" you then it is to keep running.

 

[Coxy]

Hence why I think in both situations the referee should just yell "held, play the ball", or "go back and play it" or whatever. It's too harsh either way for a penalty.

But it should by no means be play on.

If you play it when you're not held it should be a changeover/scrum. If you don't immediately go back to play the ball when the referee calls you back, it should be a changeover/scrum.

 

[Anonymous person]

I Agree that a player shouldnt be penalised for playing the ball to early. But if you choose to play it, you accept the tackle.

And this is what I disagree with. You're basically introducing the Touch footy dump and roll.

but youre not introducing that at all - its not a tackle, so the defenders dont have to get back and on-side. if you did decide to do the touch footy dump and roll youd be disadvantaging your team, and would get driven back every single tackle as the defenders can just keep walking forwards, tackling the guy who picks up the ball. theres no possible way that it would ever make anyone play touch footy style.

draggx, when i roll the ball back after being tagged in oztag i dont put the ball infront of me and roll it back, i have my hand on the front of the ball and roll it back. thats not a knock-on. noone puts the ball directly down in a stationary position and then rolls it back with their foot, i havent seen anyone do that for 10 years.

 

[Coxy]

Hahahaha, I know that AP...but draggx said....oh FFS, I give up. LOLZ

 

[Anonymous person]

oh yeah i see what you were getting at now (just saw that post of draggxs), and i agree - voluntarily tackling yourself should never count as a tackle as that would be giving you an advantage.

 

[Charmamba]

I Agree that a player shouldnt be penalised for playing the ball to early. But if you choose to play it, you accept the tackle.

And this is what I disagree with. You're basically introducing the Touch footy dump and roll.

but youre not introducing that at all - its not a tackle, so the defenders dont have to get back and on-side. if you did decide to do the touch footy dump and roll youd be disadvantaging your team, and would get driven back every single tackle as the defenders can just keep walking forwards, tackling the guy who picks up the ball. theres no possible way that it would ever make anyone play touch footy style.

draggx, when i roll the ball back after being tagged in oztag i dont put the ball infront of me and roll it back, i have my hand on the front of the ball and roll it back. thats not a knock-on. noone puts the ball directly down in a stationary position and then rolls it back with their foot, i havent seen anyone do that for 10 years.

You havent seen an NRl player use their feet to roll the ball back in 10yrs?

i thought you watched it every week? it happens every game

 

[dukey]

I think he means in Oztag.

 

[Anonymous person]

You havent seen an NRl player use their feet to roll the ball back in 10yrs?

i thought you watched it every week? it happens every game

no, i mean i havent seen any players just plonk the ball down FORWARD from their hands, so the ball is motionless on the ground, then physically reach forward with their leg and roll it back, for 10 years. they always roll the ball back with their hand and just 'have a go' at it with their foot. its at the point where it doesnt even matter if they touch the football with their foot or not, as long as they make an attempt at it.

 

[Dexter]

Well I completly agree with AP and totally get where he is coming from on the V tackle thing

 

[Charmamba]

about playing the ball for no reason and not even having it count in the 6tackles

 

[Anonymous person]

lol

thats not what im saying people will or should do. that would disadvantage their team immensely.

 

[Charmamba]

if you have a player close enough to be able to jump in the dummy half role. then his close enough to take a pass and make another 5m.. If there are to many defenders around you. take the damn tackle and allow your team mates time to get in line.

if you cant do that go play AFL or something

 

[Professor47]

Im eliminating myself from the V tackle debate!

On a side note: Agreed about the forward passes AP. I think its about time we used it. More often than not there IS a blatant forward pass and they can't rule on it so they give it a try. Garbage.

Agreed about this 'separation' business ... don't even know when they implemented this. Since when were knock-ons tries? I want pressure by the hand and in CONTROL.

Not sure if you mentioned it but vid ref should be for grounding and offside ONLY. I know they won't do this for perhaps many years to come though...

 

[Coxy]

Im eliminating myself from the V tackle debate!

On a side note: Agreed about the forward passes AP. I think its about time we used it. More often than not there IS a blatant forward pass and they can't rule on it so they give it a try. Garbage.

Agreed about this 'separation' business ... don't even know when they implemented this. Since when were knock-ons tries? I want pressure by the hand and in CONTROL.

Not sure if you mentioned it but vid ref should be for grounding and offside ONLY. I know they won't do this for perhaps many years to come though...

Not sure what's changed in technology since 2000, but that was the one year the video referee was able to call forward passes. I remember one absolute shocker against us.

Knights player pops an offload from 1 metre out from the line. David Fairleigh catches the ball OVER the line and puts it down. Ref goes to the video referee. It's forward for all you like. Decision? Try.

LOLZ

"Angle wasn't conclusive" according to the video referee. LOLZ.

 

[Dexter]

If they go down the road of giving 6 more instead of a penalty then it should be 6 more from the end of the set, so if a penalty is given on the second the attacking side should get to play out their set then restart the next 6.

 

[Charmamba]

IF administrators follow cricket's lead and shorten rugby league Tests to 60 minutes, the Poms would be a realistic chance of beating us.
At the moment, they don't have the mental toughness to go the full distance - and it's been that way for 15 years.

But all the good work the home side did in the opening three quarters of the game was undone by what they didn't do in the final 20 minutes. As soon as a crack appeared, the Kangaroos came pouring through.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/spor ... 65,00.html

Andrew Johns thinks a 60minute international game would be better and more competitive. If the english cant play the 80minutes now then tough to them.