19 replies to this topic

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Not a fan. As it stands, it basically gives the team with the advantage a "free go" to chance their arm and if it doesn't come off, they get the ball back. From what I've seen so far, it just ends up resulting in the attacking team kicking ahead and hoping for the best.

I can see why it has been included (when they are past the "advantage line" is down to interpretation and so this eliminates that), but if it always ends up a "hit and hope" scenario then I hope it gets changed.

Perhaps they could tinker it so that the team with the advantage loses the advantage if they kick it? Surely if you decide to kick ahead, you've taken your advantage?

[Old Frightful]

That'll be the Ratchford kick from the Hull-Wire game then. I commented about it on the game thread.

Bloody daft rule putting refs under more pressure.

[Griff]

I like it. But I agree kicking the ball is not necessarily the best option. Chances are that the defence will get the ball because they're usually nearer.

Give it a chance and see if the players can work it out.

[tim2]

It simplifies the ref's job. No need for interpretation.

[Just Browny]

I wasn't a fan in principle, but now I've seen it a couple of times I like it. I think having 'a free go' is a good thing and encourages the footballers in our game to try something different, maybe the little chip over the top.

[Just Browny]

OK, the two fatties hoofing it downfield in this game hasn't been the best advert for the change.

[Padge]

It seems the coaches so far haven't worked out strategies for this one yet, once they do we could see some interesting moves. Meanwhile watch the fun as players try and work out what the hell they are supposed to be doing.

[gingerjon]

OK, the two fatties hoofing it downfield in this game hasn't been the best advert for the change.

We need fatties aimlessly hoofing the football to convert Sale fans to our game.

It's a good rule change. As I've forgotten, is it also one that the NRL/international rules have done too?

[Trojan]

This afternoon at Fev we came down the slope and the wing was tackled into touch just short of the Hunslet line, the ref called the players back to a scrum on halfway with Fev feed, presumably under this new law.

[Padge]

If I'm not mistaken this isn't a new law as such but just reverting to something more like the original interpretation.

[tonyXIII]

There were a couple of these in the Salford - HKR game and it does seem a bit aimless. Padge could be right, give it time. But how about this? Kick for touch and, if you find it, you get the feed? Not thought it through, it might be too great an advantage, but what do you think?

[back to the future]

OK, the two fatties hoofing it downfield in this game hasn't been the best advert for the change.

I thought the 2 hoofing downfield were Howerth and Dixon hardly David Solomonas,but i could be wrong

[Just to be clear]

It's a good rule change. As I've forgotten, is it also one that the NRL/international rules have done too?

Just to be unclear, the NRL rule is that the advantage has been taken if a referee says so, and it is up to every referee to decide that their own way.

[Viking Warrior]

the first time i saw it happen was at the stoop in the first game when luke dorn just wellied the ball down field without any chase. thus being called back for a scrum. to me it is a stupid and unnecessary chang of the rules. i counted 3 or 4 occasions in tonights game from salford. needs scrapping ASAP......................

[Padge]

the first time i saw it happen was at the stoop in the first game when luke dorn just wellied the ball down field without any chase. thus being called back for a scrum. to me it is a stupid and unnecessary chang of the rules. i counted 3 or 4 occasions in tonights game from salford. needs scrapping ASAP......................

The limited tackle rule took a time to bed in, ball back from a kick straight in touch wasn't popular and the removal of line-outs and the introduction of the PTB didn't go down to well at the time in certain circles.

[Viking Warrior]

behave yourself daft lad, the "new rule" is pathetic and for me just slows the game down. what next rucks and mauls??

[Padge]

behave yourself daft lad, the "new rule" is pathetic and for me just slows the game down. what next rucks and mauls??

How about you stop being daft and allow players and coaches to adapt, the return to the original interpretation will take time to get used to and then daft people like you may grow to like it. FFS give things time daft lad.

[Little Lion Man]

See the advantage rule "hoof" work for Swinton at http://www.eaglestv.co.uk/ View from 30 seconds.

Players are adapting pretty quickly if you ask me.

[barrowraiderskid]

Just a question but let's say a team drops the ball on their 40m line and the opposition picks it up kicks it forward and forces a goal line drop out what happens then?

Also when is the advantage over? Is it when the oppostion make contact with the ball or regain it?

[Just to be clear]

Just a question but let's say a team drops the ball on their 40m line and the opposition picks it up kicks it forward and forces a goal line drop out what happens then?

Also when is the advantage over? Is it when the oppostion make contact with the ball or regain it?

Just to be clear, the advantage is gained when the non-infringing team either scores a try or is tackled with the ball further upfield than where the infringement occurred.

If they are tackled behind the point of the infringement or before being tackled lose possession due to a kick or error, including the ball going dead, then they have not gained an advantage so it goes back for the scrum. Situations that would lead to a drop-out do not count as an advantage.