Things you don't like about the game

[Tiger_Watto]

We have seen far too many occasions where games are decided by 1 or 2 points. Conversions are an important part of the game and I don't think it is fair penalizing the Goal Kickers for ensuring the get the points. Stopping the clock is the fairest thing in these situations. Let them get the kick right as it is an important aspect of the game!

 

[Tiger_Watto]

I don't like Melbourne's defense.
Tackles painfully slow and boring.
Makes for a long boring game, worst team in the comp for viewing/

Melbourne have been the most successful team over the past 6 years and have been the 2nd highest point scorers over that period…. Considering the Tigers are sitting 8th over this period, how do you rate us?

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

I don't like Melbourne's defense.
Tackles painfully slow and boring.
Makes for a long boring game, worst team in the comp for viewing/

Melbourne have been the most successful team over the past 6 years and have been the 2nd highest point scorers over that period…. Considering the Tigers are sitting 8th over this period, how do you rate us?

Have to say that puzzles me too Demps… I always enjoy watching Melbourne play. They have a regimented style of football, but Smith, Slater & Cronk still always bedazzle the opposition with flair in attack.

 

[Tigerdave]

Completely forgot about Golden Point. I personally hate it and don't see a problem with having draws during the regular season.

However, if they *have* to have it, make it golden try and/or do a different points system as others have suggested here, don't think we want to have anything overly complicated though, like they do in the Union.

How about having a Saturday afternoon game as well? A televised one?

 

[happy_tiger]

Completely forgot about Golden Point. I personally hate it and don't see a problem with having draws during the regular season.

However, if they *have* to have it, make it golden try and/or do a different points system as others have suggested here, don't think we want to have anything overly complicated though, like they do in the Union.

How about having a Saturday afternoon game as well? A televised one?

Also tigerDave if they keep golden point and stop golden try make all penalties given as differential in extra time so a game can't be decided by a penalty goal

 

[Tigerdave]

Completely forgot about Golden Point. I personally hate it and don't see a problem with having draws during the regular season.

However, if they *have* to have it, make it golden try and/or do a different points system as others have suggested here, don't think we want to have anything overly complicated though, like they do in the Union.

How about having a Saturday afternoon game as well? A televised one?

Also tigerDave if they keep golden point and stop golden try make all penalties given as differential in extra time so a game can't be decided by a penalty goal

yeah that's another idea as well, certainly a move in a better direction than what we currently have.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Increase premiership points for a win to 3 points.

Bring in golden try for round matches. Teams can still take penalty goals/field goals, but the game does not finish. Victory attained in the following manner:

- Game is over at any time if a team scores a try to place them into the lead (including the conversion).
- At the end of five minutes each way, teams with highest points wins if no tries have been scored.

Winning team gets 2 points, losing team gets 1 point. In the case of a draw after golden try, both teams get 1 point.

This should have two effects:

- teams will go for the try
- referees will officiate as they have for the previous 80 minutes

For finals matches, 10 minutes each way. Golden try if scores still locked after 10 minutes each way.

 

[Marshall_magic]

Golden try is one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard (just my opinion). I still don't know why if a field goal is good in the 80th minute is isn't good in extra time. It would be like having a tied cricket match and having a super over but saying you can only score runs in boundaries. Regular season games end in a draw, finals games have 5 or 10 each way then golden point to get a winner. Golden try won't lead to more exciting football, you'd just be replacing field goal shots with bombs.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

It would be like having a tied cricket match and having a super over but saying you can only score runs in boundaries.

That would be awesome.

 

[Tigerdave]

Golden try is one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard (just my opinion). I still don't know why if a field goal is good in the 80th minute is isn't good in extra time. It would be like having a tied cricket match and having a super over but saying you can only score runs in boundaries. Regular season games end in a draw, finals games have 5 or 10 each way then golden point to get a winner. Golden try won't lead to more exciting football, you'd just be replacing field goal shots with bombs.

Because having field goals going around reminds people of penalty shoot outs in soccer, it's crap.

 

[jirskyr]

It allows another player to get to marker, it doesnt have to be the tackler.

I think you are confusing what you think is legs tacklers holding on longer with tacklers lying around in the play the ball getting in the dummy halfs way, which has clearly become a tactic…refs are instructed not to penalise this as it just makes the ruck messier as is

But that already exists. Any two players can stand at marker if the legs tackler rolls away and retreats to the line. Not saying anything about tacklers generally lying around.

What I am saying is regardless of how long you let a clean 1-1 legs tackler hold on, he is going to struggle to get to his feet and back to marker more quickly than the attacker to his feet and playing the ball. Therefore really all the ref needs to do is allow the legs tackler to hold on a bit longer to let the markers set, which has already been implemented this year as a sort of variation on dominant tackles.

 

[Marshall_magic]

It allows another player to get to marker, it doesnt have to be the tackler.

I think you are confusing what you think is legs tacklers holding on longer with tacklers lying around in the play the ball getting in the dummy halfs way, which has clearly become a tactic…refs are instructed not to penalise this as it just makes the ruck messier as is

But that already exists. Any two players can stand at marker if the legs tackler rolls away and retreats to the line. Not saying anything about tacklers generally lying around.

**What I am saying is regardless of how long you let a clean 1-1 legs tackler hold on, he is going to struggle to get to his feet and back to marker more quickly than the attacker to his feet and playing the ball. Therefore really all the ref needs to do is allow the legs tackler to hold on a bit longer to let the markers set, which has already been implemented this year as a sort of variation on dominant tackles.**

I like MG's idea (not often I say that) where you make all 1 on 1 tackles dominant, and I would go a step further and say if a tackle has any more than 2 in it, then it cannot be declared dominant. This rewards good runs where it takes 3 or 4 defenders to bring down the attacking player and also rewards strong one on one defence. It would also eliminate gang tackling.

 

[Yossarian]

It allows another player to get to marker, it doesnt have to be the tackler.

I think you are confusing what you think is legs tacklers holding on longer with tacklers lying around in the play the ball getting in the dummy halfs way, which has clearly become a tactic…refs are instructed not to penalise this as it just makes the ruck messier as is

But that already exists. Any two players can stand at marker if the legs tackler rolls away and retreats to the line. Not saying anything about tacklers generally lying around.

What I am saying is regardless of how long you let a clean 1-1 legs tackler hold on, he is going to struggle to get to his feet and back to marker more quickly than the attacker to his feet and playing the ball. Therefore **really all the ref needs to do is allow the legs tackler to hold on a bit longer to let the markers set, which has already been implemented this year as a sort of variation on dominant tackles**.

Isn't that what Ink is saying? Is there a directive on this being a dominant tackle? If there is I don't recall hearing a ref call dominant for a legs tackles at all this season.

 

[Demonborger]

There is too much betting advertising, they need to eliminate completely from television coverage - a sideboard or small painted patch on the field is enough imo, less Munsie.

 

[Demonborger]

A idea around strips in 2+ man tackles would be to allow the defenders to hit the ball out of the defenders arms, but penalize the defenders if they grab a hold of the ball and rip it lose. The would be plenty of grey areas as it is open to the refs interpretation and so could be a minefield of fail, but it might put a bit more emphasis of ball security.

I like the rule about strips too, if a player has the ball stripped and it goes directly to ground it should be 6 again for whoever ends up with possession.

Creating a few more areas of contest for the ball could freshen the game up, but I can also see problems in that play will become too focused upon stripping the ball and we could see teams swapping possession half a dozen times in a 10m box ala fumbleball.

Imo the independent Commission needs to introduce a research and development group, give them a vision for the game based upon general fan expectations (i.e find out what the fans like about the game) and see how they can adjust the rules along those lines. They can then develop new rules, state what they hope to achieve and how it relates to what the fans want to see (by and large) and then test it out rigorously to see if it achieves that or something else.
I don't want to see the game turn into something that has no resemblance to rugby league, but think that a few rule changes here and there could positively change the metagame (how the game is played):
1) more emphasis on the passing and running game
2) reward one on one tackles, less emphasis on gang tackles and wrestling
3) reward good kicking, but not random aimless lottery kicking
4) as fluid as possible
5) consistent refereeing that encourages the teams to play a certain way, as intended - with a penalty scheme that has reduced potential for single decisions to change momentum

 

[Juro]

Reduce halves to 30 minutes, but stop the clock whenever the ball is out of play (eg packing scrums, waiting for goal kicks, waiting for restarts after scoring, pauses before drop-outs). Have these as chances for tv ads, but penalise teams if they take too much time. I don't think the gamesmanship of wasting time, running down the clock or giving their team a breather, adds any value at the moment.

 

[Jimmy_Cage]

I agree with many of these points but what burns me the most is how players get away with raking the ball out of the attackers arms! we have a video ref? he should be used in those situations, its unfair being tackled by 3 behemoths and as your getting up to play the ball one of them rips out the ball your team loses total momentum absolute crap if caught should be sent to Bali with a bag full of Marijuana or have to sit through a Lady Gaga concert

 

[innsaneink]

It allows another player to get to marker, it doesnt have to be the tackler.

I think you are confusing what you think is legs tacklers holding on longer with tacklers lying around in the play the ball getting in the dummy halfs way, which has clearly become a tactic…refs are instructed not to penalise this as it just makes the ruck messier as is

But that already exists. Any two players can stand at marker if the legs tackler rolls away and retreats to the line. Not saying anything about tacklers generally lying around.

Not if its a line break….as soon as the tacklers hit the deck -99% of the time belly down -the refs called tackled and the attackers up playing the ball...defense is shot, the roll on begins.

What I am saying is regardless of how long you let a clean 1-1 legs tackler hold on, he is going to struggle to get to his feet and back to marker more quickly than the attacker to his feet and playing the ball. **Therefore really all the ref needs to do is allow the legs tackler to hold on a bit longer to let the markers set, which has already been implemented this year as a sort of variation on dominant tackles.**

Thats what Im saying but I havent seen this occur

 

[citizen_cub]

I don't know about you guys, but does anybody get annoyed when refs call players by their first names? i.e. Benji, Cameron, Billy, Darren. They should refer to players as 'Gold No.6' or 'Purple No.1' like they do in Rugby, calling them by their first names is far too casual IMO, it sounds very unprofessional.

 

[westTAHger]

there are only two things I would like to see changed:
1\. golden point.at end of 80 min, if score level then each team deserve a point.
2\. betting on games. must stop 3 hours before game will be played, and none at all during game.