The NRL could take a leaf out of junior league's book

Reducing the number of interchanges to bring back the fatigue factor will do a number of things . It will get rid of the hulks and other 10 minute players , and allow the Billy Slaters of the game to be more effective . Imagine Daly CherryEvans or young Brooka with room to move and, later in the game , when fatigue plays a role , how many more games will be decided in the last few minutes of play , to mention only three of the talented little men in our game . All players who can go the distance will benefit . I feel that 8 replacements , two for each bench player would be the magic number . With only 8 replacements coaches would have to hold back in case of serious injury to a player late in the game . I say bring iy on .

Harry Potter reference.

Also in those days, replacements were only allowed in the first half so if a player went off injured in the second half they played a man short rather than the interchange we have now.

I totally agree with you Laurie on the ref's calling held earlier then penalising the player if he doesn't release. The only problem is we will then have the journos and commentators complaining that the refs are whistle happy and ruining the game. Personally, if the refs can keep blowing the whistle, players and coaches will get the idea.

William, the 10 metre rule came in because coaches (that dirty word again) complained when they were penalised for being inside the five metres in attack so the rules were changed for the coaches that the team did not have to retire back the five in attack. Then these self same coached complained that five metres wasn't enough room for their players so in came the ten metres rule.

I too played then. yes, we did have head down and tail up, same as now but the big difference was that players could compete for the ball, something they can't do now. I would love to see the game competitive again. Allow the marker to compete in the play the ball, let the player playing the ball be allowed to play it forward. Get rid of the stripping rule altogether let's see players have a bit of ball security. I would love to see scrums be competitive but I can't se it. They got rid of lineouts a century ago so don't even hope for those. Maybe bring back the five metre rule as it originally was, five metres back in both attack and defence.

Thanks Alex

The more I think about this comment of yours Barry, the more I agree with it.

Sounds like gimmicky rubbish to me.

Phil - The QLD team with all their nous attempted to counter the skinny 10, and, stand deeper, only to find themselves going backwoods.The speed and intensity of the modern game requires the extra space to be a spectacle. The 10 meters gives the attacking team the scope to either stand deep and execute set plays or play flat and hit the hole runners or work their way out of trouble and into better field position before kicking or shifting the ball wide etc. The dummy half run is a skill/art form.This is also imo another positive aspect of the game which only a handful players can execute..It's often the start of getting your forwards rolling through the middle third and then executing a play off the back of that momentum. The "dominant play" of either 1 pass or no pass will always be a part of the game as there is a mathematical aspect required to win games.

I wouldn't call it an abomination. Rather a successful rule change. Your argument was that it would force the offence to be more creative when the rule was brought in so that the offence could be more creative. This years and last years SOO series were below par but it wasn't because of the ten metre rule it was because of officials not enforcing the ten metre rule along with a fair list of other rules. Watch a replay of game 2 this year and it was atrocious how short the refs were standing back, and players from both sides were still a metre or two I front of him every single play. There is nothing wrong with the 10 metre rule and if we change it back to 5 then in 5 years time there will be calls to being back the 10 metre rule, if not, then immediately after it's changed.

WDD - Well in comparison for instance we have NSW vs Queensland SOO, producing way too many slog matches, (yes the football has been overrated for some time) yet we have the best on park. At least the best on park used to produce scintillating football vs the best on park....and not on the back of touch football easy meters. Simple fact is they introduced a major law change without any (or substantial) trial, which is ridiculous. And yes I'm not saying its the absolute solution, but the 10 meter easy gain in it's current form is an abomination and there should be a solution. Rules and referees need to work as an absolute "team" to come up with the right answers. Current refereeing is being highly mismanaged by baby soft amateurs. Having said that, it still is the greatest game....

Watch someone other than the three best attacking teams with some of the best players ever at the time and you'll see it was becoming very boring and one dimensional in attack. I don't think any teams or individuals pushed it specifically but rather most supported the idea when it came up and that was that. The only thing I believe a 5 metre rule would do is eliminate teams need to wrestle, however why would they stop when it's been shown to be so effective?

William Dalton Davis have you not seen NRL before the 10m rule? Watch the Raiders, Broncos & Panthers early 1990s. Who was responsible for pushing for the 10m rule anyway? Would be interesting to know.

Do you remember why the 10 metre rule came into being? It was because sets of six had become boring with most teams bash and barging their way up field so they made the ten metre rule to encourage more creative plays. Sound familiar?

Muzz, what has the 5 meter rule got to do with that game, considering it was played with the current rule set?? Clearly it was the 10 meter easy yardage mistake free dummy half, one off the ruck plays that killed that game. The idea of a 5 meter rule is that the attack would need to be more "creative", stand deeper, pushing players out of their "corridors" etc to make yardage and break the line, instead of the "organised" touch football methodology. In co-junction with a restricted interchange its worth a look.

The thing I miss most about league is that a game used to turn once, this was usually from fatigue. Added more interest to the last 15 minutes of the game. Since they increased the interchange it doesn't happen as much. Drop it back to 6. For player safety they must be allowed to come back on so injuries can be assessed. I can remember watching them getting treated near the side line because once you were of that was it. Every team used to need a Gary Larson or a Billy Moore ie 80 min player the last 10 mins they used to come into their own. It was very important to pick a balanced forward pack. Would these two play SOO now?

For once...? :-)

Rob C - I think there should be some reward that encourages a more expansive style of play.I'd like to see a no kicking rule unless your in the red zone.This would encourage teams to shift the ball more to improve their field position.It would also reward good D. Perhaps a 5 point try if it starts in your own half.Successful teams do opt for a mathematical playing system in the modern game with an emphasis on completion rates.This still leaves room for the playmakers to pick the right moment to add the spark. The mod rules are great for kids as it encourages team work and teaches them to pass.Maybe a little basic for the big boys. Not too sure about contesting the ball.Players will constantly be trying to rake it out and the game would get sloppy.

If you would like to see how reducing the 10 metre rule back to 5 would play out in the modern game, watch this years SOO 2 again.Apart from the result, it was the most frustrating game i watched this year.