Let me preface this article by saying that rugby league remains an outstanding spectacle. The standard of games continues to be at a high level and that has been reflected in a crowd average on the weekend of almost 22,000.
That notwithstanding, there’s always room for improvement and, with six rounds behind us, it’s now clear that certain areas of the game need to be addressed.
Who would have thought that the ability of the attacking team to consistently reach the opponent’s 40 from a kickoff would be a negative?
Under the old five-metre rule, teams would see far less of the opposition’s half, resulting in less attacking football and more grind.
Yet with the advent of the torpedo bomb amidst a few other spiralling, ducking and diving variations, the last-tackle option for teams at the 40 or 30 has been reduced to basically one tactic: put it up and hope the fullback or winger drops it.
It makes perfect sense: why aim for the in-goal from that distance with little hope of trapping the ball carrier for a dropout?
Better to play Lotto. At worst the opposition will probably be tackled in the same spot anyway.
The only answer is to force teams to be more creative before they ever get out of their own half, something we’re seeing more rarely than ever in 2013.
We can do it with one rule adjustment and one new innovation.
The adjustment is simple: we need to begin favouring the defensive team when the team in possession is bringing the ball out from its own line, by reducing the 10-metre corridor to seven or eight
Before you hurl your computer against your wall covered in league posters from the 80s when GF scores were 4-2 and 6-4, allow me to explain.
One thing we’ve lost to a large extent in the modern game is the battle for teams to clear their own 20 when they’re under duress.
The 10-metre rule has been fantastic for rugby league but it has now made it too easy to use one-out forward runs to get to the halfway line or even further before putting up a mind-numbing bomb.
Closing down the corridor will mean teams will have to use second-phase play and more creativity on the edges to advance the ball before the kick.
It will also raise the excitement level as fans watch the defensive team charge up and pummel the ball carriers, attempting to bury them inside their own 30.
Referees will simply move up a couple of metres and the players will move with them. If anyone thinks there’ll be controversy over offside interpretations, the answer is: of course there will be.
That hasn’t changed for over a hundred years.
As soon as the ball moves into the defensive team’s half, the corridor expands back to 10 metres to reward attacking teams and encourage expansive play.
If a team with the ball has been creative and/or powerful enough to reach its opponent’s territory at the end of its set and still wants to bomb, they will have earned that right.
The next factor to consider is how to further encourage the team bringing the ball out from its line to get creative with the football?
Given the power and accuracy of today’s kickers, teams may still opt for one-out runs for the first five tackles.
The answer is a new rule that I believe should have been in effect for a long time: restarting the tackle count for teams that reach halfway after third tackle from kickoffs and second tackle after all other kicks and 20m restarts.
I’m not suggesting that this would spark creativity every time teams found themselves on their own line, but it certainly would provide a strong incentive.
If successful, the attacking team would be guaranteed a few tackles inside the opponent’s 20, having started at their own tryline.
With both rules in effect, you’d have excitement, heightened energy and more creativity in get-out situations, with the defensive team crashing in on the ball carriers and the attacking team looking for opportunities to restart its tackle count or simply gain precious territory for its kick.
Referees would adapt to the greater complexity involved in the count and the new option would become second nature after a short period of time.
It is time for administrators to be brave and make the game even better. Anything that encourages creativity, heightens drama and introduces variation must be considered.
catcat
Guest
I agree with having a tackle restart for some penalties. This would also reduce the impact of ref mistakes. There will always be reffing mistakes. I think this would also take pressure off the refs knowing that they aren't influencing the game as much with a bad call or mistake. I also agree with others about clock stoppage to get more out of the game..it's a no brainer win-win As a fan of the NFL I like a lot of what they do in their game (which includes tackle restart and clock stoppage) and would also look at coaches/captains challenge in some way. Then refs could then get captains to make a challenge and not keep whinging all game. Coaches like Ricky Stuart could challenge all those terrible calls... :P One part of the game I find hard to judge live is if a player has lost the ball in the tackle or had it stripped by the tacklers. Often I think the refs just can't see whats happening in the motion of the tackle, next thing the ball has popped out. I think something needs to be done to make this one easier to officiate....not sure what though......
The Spectator
Roar Guru
Rule changes, they cant get these ones right now, the article reads of a fan whos team need a kicking game! the game is nearly perfect as it is and i can see the ruck still needs work with advantages towards offencive or defencive efforts in tackles but because the refs are mostly not ex players they will never be able to interpret the momentum properly as with passing momentum, We are nearly there though.
Meesta Cool
Guest
I have often felt that teams are gaining lots of ground advantage from penalties that don't really warrant a free kick, I would like to see -- Offside, ruck infringements (handling the ball , interference etc) and other 'wussy penalties', be awarded with a restart of t he tackle count rather than a free kick, Leave penalties for tactics that deserve them (Late hits, grapple, high contact etc.. Apart from that we have mucked about with the rules too much, maybe one or two changes max per year, - trialled a t trial games at the start of the season reviewed and adopted for the season if they seemed to improve the game!
The Barry
Roar Guru
If I was doing anything with the rules it would be to suggest that a kick for touch from a penalty is only used for instances of foul play. Teams get up the field pretty easily anyway at the moment and a penalty for a relatively minor indescretion gives teams a massive leg-up. A repeat set of 6 or shot at 2 points is reward enough for most penalties.
Chris Hardiman
Roar Rookie
I'd be happy feet to if I was Phac's bank manager ya berk.
jmcm
Guest
easy fix- THE ONE MAN SCRUM!!
Pot Stirrer
Guest
U mean contested scrums like rugby that the team feeding the scrum wins 99% of them anyway and usually take 5 minutes to pack and re pack and can get 50 different reasons for a penalty ? No tks
Pot Stirrer
Guest
Seriously, Really ?? If he drops it trying to play the ball or a defender cuases him to fumble then its either a scrum or a penalty. But im pretty sure 99% of the people here would know it refers to the ball being out of the field play.
Mella
Guest
Yip while MG Burbank is doing backflips and twirls with his rule suggestions, a straightforward rule like this would be much better. Other simple ideas I think the last tackle should be run only so if u kick you at least give up one tackle, and punish the brain dead bomb, if the defensive player marks the ball make it a penalty from where the ball was kicked. Then if you are going to bomb, you better make it good. League needs to heighten the risk versus reward for these horribly monotonous game plans and kicks.
reality bites
Guest
League could have the best of both worlds if they stole a concept from rugby 7s - the 3 man scrum. You get contestable scrums, no scrum collapses or penalties and 3 forwards out of the defensive line.
reality bites
Guest
Rugby league has a break in play at every tackle (i.e. the ball is dead, defence must retire 10 metres, no one is 'playing' football).
Code warmonger
Guest
# Bring back unlimited tackles # Bring back contested scrums, at the moment it is a joke # Stopping the clock when the ball is not in play. Only when the ball is live does the clock run down. # Increase the value of drop goals to 2, 3, or 4 or more, to encourage more variety in scoring. # Fighting should be allowed as in ice hockey, providing it is not the cheap shot variety. # Possibly allowing some form of forward pass.
reality bites
Guest
Unless you consider a tackle a 'break', given the ball is dead at the play the ball I think it is.
Pot Stirrer
Guest
No more interchanges, They dont do it in soccer or RU,
Happy Feet
Guest
Yep, if the game improves like Souths did when they got rid of Piggens, they'll be on to a winner ;)
Yawhoa
Guest
The scrum, is the first to come to mind. Lets get back to having players pack down in a scrum according to their jersy number/position!, and if they are not in position the scrum gets packed down without them - which could allow the "opposing full scrum" to push the "half formed scrum" team off the ball. Otherwise the current circus of a scrum can remain as a "rest peice of play".
oikee
Guest
Look, i can shoot down that theory simply by saying add a extra tackle to the tackle count. Instead of 6 tackles, make it seven. You wont need a reduction in the tackle count because all players would be fatiqued trying to defend a extra tackle each set. So a reduction in the interchange will just increase the injury count and more players will go off wounded or with cramps and hamstring injuries. What then, get more doctors, more work houses for the poor,.. hold that was a movie, i got carried away. Scrooge i think, more work houses for the poor. hehe./ Look you get the idea. For the love of Larry, i will say this again, every action has a reaction. You change one thing and all you do is create another problem, leave the game alone. It is perfect, and nothing is perfect.
Nick
Roar Guru
Turbo, with the 'true 80 minutes' thing...I think you are citing rugby union figures. Rugby league actually has few breaks.
kill or be killed
Guest
Chris is on the money, the only thing that needs to change is a reduction in interchange.... bring the endurance back into the sport rather than it being all about power...... will see a lot more creative options taken at the back end of halves if you have some tiring bodies out there and will also see more skillful players being brought through rather than these big powerfiul types who cant pass a ball.
Delpy
Roar Pro
There needs to be a five minute sin bin.