Rules you would like to change

[Bazzinator]

Field goals: no attacking players acting as blockers if they do rule obstruction

Kick returns: If metres gained under 10 then zero tackle if more tackle one

Challenge system: maybe 2 incorrect per team per half.

Maybe a timeout system where the coach can talk to the players for a minute

Grounding rule is shocking change it completely to you have to come back up with the ball as well and not loose control in the process.

Stripping rule allowed to strip the ball at any time without consequence would encourage better ball handling

Thats all i can think of for now

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

- I'd also like them to toughen up on the markers moving off the mark, they should be penalised, not be seen as 'shortening the 10m'

Agree 100%. There are players who have made careers by making more metres after being tackled than before (Watmough). They should also police more heavily tackled players getting up to the left or right of the marker, which essentially makes the markers offside.

 

[LARDS]

The diving suggestion, a bit too hard to police

If the obvious ones were pinged, then they would be hesitant to do it.
Like when you you see a player wriggling on the ground as if someones holding him down and no-ones near him.
We don't want our game getting like soccer.

 

[AngryEmu]

All we need is simplicity and consistency. We have too many rules these days that can be interpreted different ways which leads to confusion and frustration.

Rules need to be black and white, no shades of grey.

 

[Yossarian]

2 main changes for me:

1) If the ball is passed to you and comes off any part of your body above your knees is a knock-on. I really don't think you should be rewarded for the ball hitting your chest, head, shoulder etc. If you don't catch it you should be punished.

2) Grounding of the ball for tries should be with the hands or arms (below the elbow). No torso try, no tries using your wedding tackle, just ground with the hands.

I also agree that walking off the mark should be more heavily punished. The ref saying he shortened the ten doesn't make up for the fact your markers are now out of play.

 

[steve-o]

Grounding Rule: Must be with the hand or arm, player must have a certain amount of control (if they are holding the ball they must control it all the way until it hits the ground, if it is on the ground they just have to put their arm on it).

If a player makes a one on one tackle it is dominant.

Bad reads are not an obstruction. If the decoy runner takes out the outside shoulder of a defender either commits to tackling a decoy by changing their line of movement, play on. If a decoy takes a defender out, who didn't change their line, obstruction.

i agree with ur grounding rule: players either have to touch the ball with their hand or lower arm (from the elbow down) simulatneously when it hits the grounds, or they have to grab it with their hands and put it down. Too often players chasing grubbers just dive with their arms out hoping to ground it without actually having any control.

also agree with ur obstruction rule: if a defender comes in on the wrong bloke: play on. but if the decoy runner takes out someone whos sliding over in cover: no try

 

[tig_prmz]

also i would like
each teams to have 3 or 2 challenges
so when theres a call gone wrong
the only time the video ref can change the game is when the coaches challenge something

Umm yes, but what about the time when video refs make the wrong decision?

Also, Robbie darts out of dummy half doesn't get a penalty, he challenges the call and is unsuccessful, this would mean Tigers will lose the momentum etc.

And.. who makes the call whether to challenge or not? Rugby League is a very fast game, if you wait for your captain to challenge, you lost like 30 seconds coz the action might be going near one sideline and the captain might be on the other side of the field.

These are just some problems with the challenging system. It works OK in tennis, cricket but in Rugby League,it's all about the pace of the game and how you utilise it to your benefit!

 

[jirskyr]

Change the one that says R Farah cannot be awarded marker penalties.

 

[tigergran]

My two cents worth (1c apiece…)
\
\
1 The stripping rule - hang on to the ball, guys!!

2 Benefit of the doubt to the attacking side - if in doubt - No Try!!
\
\
Tigergran

 

[Fraze23]

I would like to see the following rules introduced or maybe just enforced.
1\. Front rowers cant dive on the ball in the scrum
2\. No knees of any form can make contact with the back of an attacking player
3\. You MUST make CONTACT with your FOOT when playing the ball.

Seriously tho.
I'd like to see them stop players moving off the mark in the play the ball, easts and manly work this effectively, they take a step forward or to the side putting the markers in an offside position, giving the dummy half a rails run. Shortening it is moving off the mark imo which is a penalty or a scrum.
Dominant and Surrender tackles are absolute rubbish. A tackle is a tackle get off them and lets get on with the game.
The obstruction rule is a farce, players see a decoy running towards them, they fall over and get rewarded with a penalty.
The stripping rule is another one that gets my goat, if you cant hold the ball dont play the game, simple.

I would also like to see time off when ever the ball is out of play. It doesnt seem fair that teams can deliberately place the ball out of play and be rewarded with the clock ticking down.

WE NEED TO SCRAP THE TWO REFEREE SYSTEM. Egotystical referees are killing the game. Classic example souths v parramatta in golden point, the scrum disbands so he calls time back on. By the books he did the right thing. But by the game and the spirit of the game he couldnt have been more wrong.

That'll do me

 

[Fraze23]

My two cents worth (1c apiece…)

2 Benefit of the doubt to the attacking side - if in doubt - No Try!!
\
\
Tigergran

I forgot about that one. Your exactly right. If theres any doubt why is it a try?

 

[alien]

Kick returns: If metres gained under 10 then zero tackle if more tackle one

Hmm but that would punish teams that chase well and it would reward fullbacks for not running straight and hard.

 

[Gobbs]

1). Stripping Rule - 'if you can't hold on to the ball, then you don't deserve to have it'. The amount of drop ball through loose carries, blatant drops balls and acting to influence a penalty and an overall lack of respect for the ball is an absolutelt disgrace. Time to go back to the future and make players hold on to the damn thing!

2). Scrums - a total overhall of the 'lean on' or 'time for a breather'. Props & Hookers don't pack in properly, the entire backrow breaks early. They're a waste of time and cost Wests a week of in this years Final series. Time to get tough on the rules and penalise if they are not adheared to correctly. Simple. Set a precedent and let teams abide by it.

 

[mrbates78]

this relates to the stripping rule also…if someone is in the process of grounding the ball for a try, and a defender manages to stop the try by stipping the ball, the ball goes forward and the attacker (or another attacker in the team) manages to then ground the ball, that should not be a try. eg. the anasta one in the GF or a fifita one a few months back

 

[Yossarian]

My two cents worth (1c apiece…)

2 Benefit of the doubt to the attacking side - if in doubt - No Try!!
\
\
Tigergran

I forgot about that one. Your exactly right. If theres any doubt why is it a try?

It's more the interpretation of the rule that has gone wrong. I think the intention was if the was probably a try scored but couldn't be seen it should be a try but as we see now, some referees think it's "well I can't prove it isn't a try so I'll give it".

To be honest I never really understood the point of having as a different option for the video ref - it's worth the same 4 points as a normal try.

 

[Fraze23]

There should be two forms of benefit of the doubt. If it swings towards the attacking side then benefit of the doubt goes to them, or if its in favour of the defence then the defending team should be given benefit of the doubt.
Its still a rule that gets made a mess of, its like a get out of jail free card for the video ref

 

[Paris_Cobbs]

The way the double movement rule works has been changed by video ref - the rules should be changed to reflect this new interpretation Or the actual written rule should be enforced.

Jeremy Smith's try vs WT in the semi would have been called a double movement five years ago. His forward progress was stopped and his arm with the ball was held for a moment by Galloway. Any movement after that moment is a double movement, according to the rules as they are written. It needs to be clarified and rewritten if that's what we want.

The whole dominant/surrender tackle business called by the ref is stupid and it gives the ref too much control over the ruck.

 

[Raptor]

I'd like to see the ref actually do something about players moving off the mark, if they crawl 3 or 4 metres forward like easts do all the time either penalise them or make them go back to the mark and play it.
Scrums need to be over hauled they are a joke now very rarely does everyone bind proerly and quite often the lock has broken beofre the ball clears the scrum.
Striping rule needs throwing out unless it's a gang tackle 3 or more players in it..
How about the refs actually p;lay a 10 m line not 11 not 12 not 8, but 10m..

 

[Eye_Of_Wests_Tigers]

Few inclusions to encourage open play and reduce predicatable and boring "St George" styleplay:

1) All teams have to bind in a scrum and wait a minimum of 3 seconds after the ball clears before they dissolve the scrum. With 2 referees this should be able to be policed. It would open the game up and allow for set moves. I also find it annoying to see a second rower standing at 5/8 for a basic hit-up or a prop breaking from a scrum to mow down a centre or winger before they get the opportunity to run.

2) If the ball is kicked from anywhere wtihin the opposing teams 20 and grounded by the defending team in goal it gets returned to the 20 for a restart (grobbers included). This would encourage teams to put the ball through the hands and stop this incessant and predicatable kicking.

3) Allow 10 interchanges but only 1 in the last 10 minutes of each half. This would bring the small men into play when the forwards tire.

4) A dominant tackle can be called if someone gets tackled around the legs in a "classic" tackle. If the attacking players "pig roots" they are penalised. This would discourage high tackling which all too often leads to careless and dangerous tackles. it also allows smaller players to pull off dominant tackles.

**5) A player can be cited for "diving" to get a penalty - basically bringing the game into disrepute**

They do that in Football, soccer for everyone else, because of the state of which it is going nowadays, as a means to stamp out unnecessary diving/simulation. Great example was central Coast vs Sydney FC when a player was suspended for two weeks for diving to gain a free-kick. This should be used in the NRL because the amount of times a player takes a dive week in week out is getting ridiculous, should be policed asap!

A Rule i would like changed is the 10m rule, if a player is offside don't call him off, just blow a bloody penalty. You hear the refs all game talk to one another identifying an offside player yet not doing a thing about it, time to put the whistle to the lips and blow a bloody penalty. i.e Tigers v Dragons, the amount of times they were offside was atonishing yet i dont think we got a dam penalty.

oh yeh also, a rule should be put into place, Don't let Shayne Hayne ref our games, he is the most biased referee on the PLANETTT

 

[Blackpearl]

1\. 8 subs
2\. time off for attempted conversions of tries
3\. team that scores a try does kick re-start
4\. any player with any attempted comedy segment on any footy show barred from playing first grade and retrospective to include 2010