NRL potential rule change: penalise teams that kick into touch

[The Daddy]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-premiership/nrl-2021-wayne-pearce-arl-comission-kicking-rule-changes-seventackle-set-for-kicking-into-touch/news-story/f70aebdb4db77f73dbff4b985309051e

So the NRL are considering bringing in a rule to make teams defend 7 tackles if they kick the ball into touch. No that's not a joke.

Who comes up with these dumb ideas. God help RL if the NRL ever gain control of the governance of the sport worldwide 

[UTK]

Nobody hates Rugby League more than the people running the NRL, constantly trying to change the fabric of the game for no reason. Think Christian Welch summed it up pretty well here: 

 

[The Rocket]

1 hour ago, The Daddy said:

Who comes up with these dumb ideas. God help RL if the NRL ever gain control of the governance of the sport worldwide 

I`ll tell you who...Wayne Pearce, great player but thick as two short planks.

I expect this is Pearce`s attempt at a legacy, as his time , thank God I hope, is about to come to an end on the Commission, he probably wants it called `Pearce`s rule`.

Two things stick in my mind about Pearce, this bloke who is an ARL commissioner has a reputation for dancing on tables and taking his shirt off in nightclubs. The other, about twenty years ago I saw him in his car in traffic at Balmain, I was taken aback, he was honestly preening himself in his car mirror and looking around to see if any one recognised him. This is the sort of gravitas we want in our commissioners. It depresses me sometime the jobs for legends attitude we have in the NRL.

With regard the rule change, it says it all that the best that Pearce can come up with is just an extension of the current 7 tackle set for balls kicked dead, absolutely nothing original or `innovative` at all.

The other thing I question is what will be the effect on 40/20 attempts, which presently is one of the few momentum changers we have in the game, christ his son, Mitchell, pulled off a brilliant one last night. Will teams be hesitant about attempting 40/20`s now ? 

If Pearce wants to leave a legacy do something original like get rid of `six-again` for the charge-down. More wayward kicks on the last, more crazy ad-lib play when a kicker can`t get his kick away and teams don`t want to be tackled with the ball, and a great momentum changer, that is something that I would like to see trialed in the last rounds of the competition.

 

[Tex Evans Thigh]

Just create your own sport and call it NRL and let the rest of us move on. It’s getting to the point where it will be ‘who scores first wins’. No hope for our sport.

[BrisbaneRhino]

Rocket - definitely the charge-down. Should be treated as though not touched by the defender so if the kicking team gets the ball back it will still most likely be last tackle.  Its utterly ridiculous that 9 times out of 10 a charge-down leads to 6 more (completely unearned) tackles for the kicking team.

[Davo5]

Just when you thought the NRL couldn’t get any dumber.

That is a ridiculous idea that serves absolutely no purpose.

[The Rocket]

27 minutes ago, BrisbaneRhino said:

Rocket - definitely the charge-down. Should be treated as though not touched by the defender so if the kicking team gets the ball back it will still most likely be last tackle.  Its utterly ridiculous that 9 times out of 10 a charge-down leads to 6 more (completely unearned) tackles for the kicking team.

Exactly, and another thing, precisely what reward did the Titans get for their charge-down of the Knights first drop-goal attempt last night, another set to the Knights but this time in a better position. I can`t see the sense in that.

[JM2010]

How many other sports constantly change their rules?

They just need to leave it alone and build from the product they have

[Damien]

Oh great, more rule changes to justify people's roles. 

[The Future is League]

It's been ditched

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/pearce-proposal-kicked-into-touch-after-savage-backlash-20210827-p58mm1.html

You just wonder what the crankies involved in the game down under will come up with next.

[Dunbar]

1 hour ago, The Future is League said:

It's been ditched

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/pearce-proposal-kicked-into-touch-after-savage-backlash-20210827-p58mm1.html

You just wonder what the crankies involved in the game down under will come up with next.

I don't think this idea was particularly good and I am still very bitter about the NRL influence on the World Cup decision but I will say this...

In the NRL the players walk onto the pitch wearing numbers 1 to 13.  They play the ball properly after they are tackled and they pack a scrum after a knock on.  It's a lot more like the sport I fell in love with than the one we play over here these days.

[DavidM]

What ? I’ve seen some stupid brainstorming ideas about the game but this is up there . It’s called tactical kicking , it’s part of the game . And when are we going to get out of this mindset that the game must be faster and faster and everything detrimental to that is bad . We need to rebalance that , not accentuate it

[DavidM]

I think there are several things that need looking at when I watch the NRL but this has never entered my head as being one of them .

[OriginalMrC]

Hey lads we've got too many blow out scores what shall we do

A. Introduce a new rule which will lead to more blow out scores 

B. Leave the game alone and stop fiddling with it all the time

Yeah let's go with A, what can possibly go wrong 

[unapologetic pedant]

13 hours ago, The Rocket said:

Exactly, and another thing, precisely what reward did the Titans get for their charge-down of the Knights first drop-goal attempt last night, another set to the Knights but this time in a better position. I can`t see the sense in that.

Can`t remember whether I mentioned the following additional reason for changing the back-to-one charge down law on the dedicated thread.- 

In the early 90s, as scrums became predictable and kickers sought more often to keep the ball in play rather than find Touch, exciting back three players like Jason Robinson went on many a brilliant weaving kick return. Nowadays the kick chase is so well organised that the fullback or winger sees a wall of 4 or 5 defenders right in his face as he collects the ball and sets off.

Without the terror of conceding a repeat set, kick pressure could be more effective, the kicker would have to stand deeper and be less able to pick his spot. If there is a malaise in RL currently, it isn`t in the number of tries scored, more in how teams gain territory from deep. Making it harder to execute a suffocating kick chase is one way to open up play early in the tackle count.

Another element needing attention here is the fatuous "running behind your own player" definition of obstruction. Currently when a fullback returns a kick he not only has to scan the chasing pack but, to avert a possible obstruction call, he also has to steer clear of a running line that takes him too close to any of his retreating teammates. Consequently it`s safer to just run headlong into the phalanx of chasers and take the tackle.

[unapologetic pedant]

10 hours ago, DavidM said:

What ? I’ve seen some stupid brainstorming ideas about the game but this is up there . It’s called tactical kicking , it’s part of the game . And when are we going to get out of this mindset that the game must be faster and faster and everything detrimental to that is bad . We need to rebalance that , not accentuate it

I`ve been crediting or blaming PVL for NRL rule changes, but perhaps the responsibility rests with the members of the "Innovation Committee".

This latest "stupid brainstorming idea" is of a piece (of a Pearce?) with the equally stupid change from a scrum to a handover after the ball crosses the touchline. That was also purported to "speed up the game".

[unapologetic pedant]

15 hours ago, BrisbaneRhino said:

Rocket - definitely the charge-down. Should be treated as though not touched by the defender so if the kicking team gets the ball back it will still most likely be last tackle.  Its utterly ridiculous that 9 times out of 10 a charge-down leads to 6 more (completely unearned) tackles for the kicking team.

I`ve had exchanges on other social media with Aussie defenders of the current charge down rule whose simplistic argument is - "played at, mate. Back to one".

They are usually flummoxed when I ask - "why is a charge down exempt from the knock-on rule?" It`s a point they`ve never previously considered. The members of the NRL`s Innovation Committee are clearly no more thoughtful.

[The Rocket]

3 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Without the terror of conceding a repeat set, kick pressure could be more effective, the kicker would have to stand deeper and be less able to pick his spot. If there is a malaise in RL currently, it isn`t in the number of tries scored, more in how teams gain territory from deep. Making it harder to execute a suffocating kick chase is one way to open up play early in the tackle count.

I think when we originally broached this topic one of the advantages of a change in the charge-down rule we discussed was that we may tend to see more errant kicks as charge-downs or attempted charge-downs, free of six-again, became a staple of the game.

The wayward kick, be it the bomb that goes straight up in the air, the attempted `down-town` kick that skews of the side of the boot or simply a kick that only gains twenty metres instead of forty all will add an element of unpredictability to our somewhat sometimes predictable game.

And this is even before we consider those delightful ricochet moments when pandemonium is unleashed as a charge-down is made.

[rlno1]

On 27/08/2021 at 10:26, UTK said:

Nobody hates Rugby League more than the people running the NRL, constantly trying to change the fabric of the game for no reason. Think Christian Welch summed it up pretty well here: 

 

Christian Welch is one of the very few players with an intelligent opinion on the game in Australia. He has also commented on how the media portray the game in a negative light and the agendas being driven. One man, if not the only man worth listening to on NRL.

[The Rocket]

23 hours ago, DavidM said:

What ? I’ve seen some stupid brainstorming ideas about the game but this is up there . It’s called tactical kicking , it’s part of the game . And when are we going to get out of this mindset that the game must be faster and faster and everything detrimental to that is bad . We need to rebalance that , not accentuate it

In the early 90`s when the Broncos were nigh on unbeatable, they remind me a little of the Panthers today, St. George under master coach Brian Smith were probably only team who had a positive win record against them. We even managed to beat them at home a couple of times.

A big part of Smith`s game plan was kicking the ball into touch at the end of every set and the Saints forwards dawdling upfield and making the Broncos wait before they could set the scrum. No scrum clocks then. The tactic was seen to put the Broncos off their game, as they were keen to get into it, and slow the tempo of the game down to suit St. Georges playing style.

Pearce a man immersed in Rugby League should know things like this, as he should know as Daly Cherry-Evans pointed out, why should a team that puts in a cross-field kick for a winger in their own half, or anywhere for that matter, be penalised with having to defend an extra tackle if such a daring and exciting play be attempted and he balls runs into touch. The game would be poorer without such plays. Hopeless.

 

[langpark]

On 27/08/2021 at 03:29, The Rocket said:

Two things stick in my mind about Pearce, this bloke who is an ARL commissioner has a reputation for dancing on tables and taking his shirt off in nightclubs.

Gee I wish you hadn't said that. I genuinely disliked him all these years but reading that, now makes me feel I need to reconsider