My Rule changes

[Raw Boned Youngster]

There has been much said about the current state of the game and its current rules. Here is what I would change.

1. No kicking at all - turnover at end of 6 tackles.
2. Markers can only tackle inside defensive 20m - otherwise they can't tackle.
3. Whoever scores the try, must take the conversation.

Kicking in the game has become ridiculously over done - sides now base their entire sets about getting to the kick. To me, this is not what league is about. Creating repeat sets has an inevitability that spoils the game. Bombs are boring and a lottery. By removing kicking you would necessitate the need to be crafty with the ball.

Exploiting marker defence has become a joke. All teams target their tight runners to get in behind the play the ball area, often milking a penalty on the way by targetting the markers. Non tackling markers would necessitate the tightening ( shrinking )of defences and eliliminate the potential penalties.

RBY

 

[Broncos08]

Non tackling markers? - this will only make for more dummy half running.

No kicking? - touch footy

If I wanted to watch a game like this, I would be going to watch touch footy every weekend.

 

[mrslong]

lol, I love rule number 3. Would love to see the props having to kick the conversions every now and then! Woot!

 

[bronco_babe77]

lol, I love rule number 3. Would love to see the props having to kick the conversions every now and then! Woot!

Lol I love this rule too. Would make for a more exciting end to games thats for sure!

But turn over on the 6th?? Nooooo [icon_thumbs_do

 

[Coxy]

I like it! Should also make tackles below the shoulders, and no more than 2 in the tackle.

Should also be able to call held yourself. So you get tackled, say "I'm held" and put your hand up, tacklers have to release you to play the ball.

 

[Broncos08]

lol, I love rule number 3. Would love to see the props having to kick the conversions every now and then! Woot!

Yup, that's not such a bad idea.

The only problem I have with this is, having a player faking an injury and says he can't take the conversion.

What I would suggest is the captain of the opposition gets to choose the player to take the conversion, if an injury occurs.

 

[Je$ter]

Rule number 2 is stupid. People would target the markers and behind the ruck even more if the markers couldn't tackle.

 

[Coxy]

Yeah, markers should be able to tackle.

I think they need to change the rules about marking square (think i mentioned it in another thread, but hey, I always like to repeat my agenda until people surrender to my will). Basically if you're on your feet, in front of and within a metre of the play the ball, you're on side.

That'll stop dummy halfs milking penalties by running from dummyhalf while markers aren't quite square.

 

[Raw Boned Youngster]

Yes they would, but by closing the hole in there, it would potentially shrink the defensive line and encourage lateral ball movement - negating the need to kick.
By the way, constantly running from dummy half in today's game is about exploiting penalties and getting field position for the kick. Under this system it wouldn't have the same significance. The rule changes would encourage creativity not merely setting up for a kick.

 

[mrslong]

I like it! Should also make tackles below the shoulders, and no more than 2 in the tackle.

Should also be able to call held yourself. So you get tackled, say "I'm held" and put your hand up, tacklers have to release you to play the ball.

[icon_lol1. yeah, i like that too. "ooh, i'm going into touch....Held, Held" excellent! [icon_shady

no more than 2 in the tackle, but you can strip! [icon_drun

 

[Broncos08]

Should also be able to call held yourself. So you get tackled, say "I'm held" and put your hand up, tacklers have to release you to play the ball.

Actually that's what the rule used to be in the 70's and 80's.

The rule was, when a tackled player thought he couldn't make anymore metres in a tackle,or he felt as if he has lost all momentum in driving forward and thinks he could get driven backwards or out into touch, he could call out "held".

Then the tacklers had 3 seconds to roll away and get back into marker position.

 

[Black Philip]

What is with everyone wanting to make these drastic changes to the game?? I'm open to one or two minor changes but things like taking the kicks out of the game altogether? That's ridiculous.

 

[Coxy]

I think they should remove tackling altogether. Add velcro to the shorts, plonk some tags on and make it oztag! :P LOL

 

[Hamm.0]

No kicks is a silly idea IMO.
Markers not tackling would create a snoozefest, more dummy half running.
Whoever scores, kicks would be interesting.

 

[Dexter]

How about taking a leaf out of the NFLs book. Conversions are still worth 2 points but you can try for 3 points by taking a tap 10m out and trying to score. You get 1 play and the opposition only have to stop the ball any way they can.

 

[Dexter]

A caller on ABC radio on the weekend had an interesting idea. If there are more than 2 in the tackle then that tackle isn't counted, so if on tackle 2 more than 2 defenders were involved the ref calls thats 2.

The more I think about it the more I like it. It would make it easier for offloads, force teams to go 1 low 1 high like it used to be and speed up the ruck. as well as get rid of the wrestle.

On the down side it would more than likely create a problem with barge over tries close to the line unless the rule didn't apply in side the 10 mtr.

Thoughts?

 

[Nashy]

Perhaps we don't change any of the on field rules, because that would be queer, and change the salary cap. Weed out the struggling useless clubs in Sydney, and get some loyalty back into it.

It's hard to teach the kids what it is to be loyal on horrible money, and in the time frames the clubs have.

 

[mrslong]

What is with everyone wanting to make these drastic changes to the game?? I'm open to one or two minor changes but things like taking the kicks out of the game altogether? That's ridiculous.

i think everyone's taking the piss. surely. [icon_lol1.