NRL General Discussion Thread

[Morkel]

Here's a novel idea, if the rule changes you made have had an effect that you don't like, how about reversing the rule change, instead of keeping it and adding another rule change?
Seriously, how do these get up in the morning and make breakfast, they are literally the definition of stupid.

Others make breakfast for them and tell them how good they are at eating.

 

[Kimlo]

Here's a novel idea, if the rule changes you made have had an effect that you don't like, how about reversing the rule change, instead of keeping it and adding another rule change?
Seriously, how do these get up in the morning and make breakfast, they are literally the definition of stupid.

No they will add this new kick off rule, that will break something else so they'll add a new rule to fix the new rule to fix the new rule to fix the new rule. And then we'll see how V'landiddly wakes up on Sunday morning to see what new rule we'll have after that.

More new rules. There's going to be a 5 metre defensive line when defending in your own half. That'll stop the blow-outs.

 

[GCBRONCO]

Apparently the NRL are considering yet another rule change, this one aimed at stopping the blowout scores (cause by their other rule changes, lol).

they are considering changing the kickoffs, so that the team that scores kicks off, instead of the team that concedes the try

 

[GCBRONCO]

Next in our line of changes designed to make the sport more enjoyable, we are adopting a AFL style goal system for conversions. If you convert a try or kick a penalty you still get 2 points, but to make the match more exciting and not hurt the goalkickers feelings we will award 1 point if they manage to kick it between the corner post and the nearest goal post. Should the ball be struck by an opponent we will deem that an illegal head high tackle and they will be sent off immediately.

We are also looking at the prospect of multiball when the attacking team gets into the opposition 20 metre defensive area.

 

[Blindside Bronco]

View attachment 13719

Trbojevic's are Time travelers.

 

[Sproj]

Next in our line of changes designed to make the sport more enjoyable, we are adopting a AFL style goal system for conversions. If you convert a try or kick a penalty you still get 2 points, but to make the match more exciting and not hurt the goalkickers feelings we will award 1 point if they manage to kick it between the corner post and the nearest goal post. Should the ball be struck by an opponent we will deem that an illegal head high tackle and they will be sent off immediately.

We are also looking at the prospect of multiball when the attacking team gets into the opposition 20 metre defensive area.

I believe they are also thinking of changing the shape of the ball to a sphere to match the play acting and to not make people offended if the ball doesn't bounce exactly in a straight line.

 

[BroncsFan]

No they will add this new kick off rule, that will break something else so they'll add a new rule to fix the new rule to fix the new rule to fix the new rule. And then we'll see how V'landiddly wakes up on Sunday morning to see what new rule we'll have after that.

More new rules. There's going to be a 5 metre defensive line when defending in your own half. That'll stop the blow-outs.

I mean the biggest issue with kicking off after scoring is that the receiving team, whilst getting the ball, could very well be trapped in their own half and actually concede territory.

If a set of six after the kick off goes to plan the first tackle at best gets just beyond the 20m off the kick off and they're probably kicking from just inside their 50m line.

The team who previously scored is then a decent chance to get the ball back beyond the 20m line on tackle 1 (so net gain compared to a normal set after a try).

Oftentimes teams will drop the ball on the set after a try as well... the pressure is high to complete the set after a try, but the pressure will be much higher to complete if you just conceded a try.

I can see it being an absolutely horrendous rule change... could you imagine how deflating it would be to a team to drop the ball after just conceding a try and giving the opposition a huge territorial advantage.

Compare that to the emotional high that would be gained by the team that just scored. Not to mention how little pressure there is on the team that just scored the try. "well done you just scored... how about you head down there and bash up the team that just conceded".

In origin I always feel that who kicks off in the first half gets an advantage. Both teams are amped up, but the team kicking off gets to just bash the opponent... it's a free hit. If they change the rule on kick offs the team that just scored will be coming off an emotional high and be given a free hit at the team coming off a low.

The biggest issue with the game under the current rules is field position and the lack of elite kickers across the majority of teams to be able to control that field position... combine that with one the of the main objectives nowadays being to attack through your defence, and you will see a crap team without a decent long kicker up against an amped up team, attacking through their defence and living offside... it just spells disaster to me.

 

[Sproj]

I mean the biggest issue with kicking off after scoring is that the receiving team, whilst getting the ball, could very well be trapped in their own half and actually concede territory.

If a set of six after the kick off goes to plan the first tackle at best gets just beyond the 20m off the kick off and they're probably kicking from just inside their 50m line.

The team who previously scored is then a decent chance to get the ball back beyond the 20m line on tackle 1 (so net gain compared to a normal set after a try).

Oftentimes teams will drop the ball on the set after a try as well... the pressure is high to complete the set after a try, but the pressure will be much higher to complete if you just conceded a try.

I can see it being an absolutely horrendous rule change... could you imagine how deflating it would be to a team to drop the ball after just conceding a try and giving the opposition a huge territorial advantage.

Compare that to the emotional high that would be gained by the team that just scored. Not to mention how little pressure there is on the team that just scored the try. "well done you just scored... how about you head down there and bash up the team that just conceded".

In origin I always feel that who kicks off in the first half gets an advantage. Both teams are amped up, but the team kicking off gets to just bash the opponent... it's a free hit. If they change the rule on kick offs the team that just scored will be coming off an emotional high and be given a free hit at the team coming off a low.

The biggest issue with the game under the current rules is field position and the lack of elite kickers across the majority of teams to be able to control that field position... combine that with one the of the main objectives nowadays being to attack through your defence, and you will see a crap team without a decent long kicker up against an amped up team, attacking through their defence and living offside... it just spells disaster to me.

It has been bought in by Vlandys regime, it is guaranteed to be a disaster.

 

[Dash]

That is how they did it in Super League, right? I was only 9 so I don't really remember whether it made a significant difference to the game or not.

 

[Foordy]

That is how they did it in Super League, right? I was only 9 so I don't really remember whether it made a significant difference to the game or not.

it didn't the Super League (at least in Australia) had plenty of blowout scores

 

[GCBRONCO]

it didn't the Super League (at least in Australia) had plenty of blowout scores

It's what happens when you try to artificially increase the amount of tries that are scored with a mindset of more tries and "faster" equals more exciting game/product but it doesn't. All your doing is manipulating the contest out of the match.

 

[Unbreakable]

Feeling bored, thought I'd list my team of players that I feel are currently underrated / undervalued in the NRL -

1. William Kennedy
2. Connor Tracey
3. Herbie Farnworth
4. Paul Momirovski
5. Matt Ikuvalu
6. Adam Doueihi
7. Kodi Nikorima
8. Luke Thompson
9. Jayden Brailey
10. Ryan Sutton
11. Luke Garner
12. Raymond Faitala-Mariner
13. Connor Watson

 

[BroncosFever]

Aside from the bucket of tries he has scored on the wing for the Roosters I don't rate Ikuvalu at all

 

[IceWorks]

And this is how you bend a salary cap.

---------------
Powerful Roosters chairman Nick Politis has shown the regard he holds Cordner in by guaranteeing to honour the remaining $1.5 million of his playing contract for 2022 and 2023.

The Roosters were under no obligation to do so but as a benchmark NRL club they knew it was the right way to handle the unwanted retirement of a club champion who has won three premierships.

 

[Morkel]

And this is how you bend a salary cap.

---------------
Powerful Roosters chairman Nick Politis has shown the regard he holds Cordner in by guaranteeing to honour the remaining $1.5 million of his playing contract for 2022 and 2023.

The Roosters were under no obligation to do so but as a benchmark NRL club they knew it was the right way to handle the unwanted retirement of a club champion who has won three premierships.

While also making sure the media presents it as a positive, generous initiative instead of dodgy as all ****.

 

[BroncsFan]

And this is how you bend a salary cap.

---------------
Powerful Roosters chairman Nick Politis has shown the regard he holds Cordner in by guaranteeing to honour the remaining $1.5 million of his playing contract for 2022 and 2023.

The Roosters were under no obligation to do so but as a benchmark NRL club they knew it was the right way to handle the unwanted retirement of a club champion who has won three premierships.

I'm not sure if this is a real article or not, but every club is obligated to payout the remaining years of a contract if the player medically retires... Souths had to pay Burgess like $4m didn't they??

The question is whether the pay out stays on the cap or not

 

[ningnangnong]

The club would be insured up to the eyeballs anyway, so I doubt it'll be coming out of their own coffers.

 

[IceWorks]

And this is how you bend a salary cap.

---------------
Powerful Roosters chairman Nick Politis has shown the regard he holds Cordner in by guaranteeing to honour the remaining $1.5 million of his playing contract for 2022 and 2023.

The Roosters were under no obligation to do so but as a benchmark NRL club they knew it was the right way to handle the unwanted retirement of a club champion who has won three premierships.

It aint the regard he holds Boyd in.. Its for the next generation of talent deciding what club to sign for.