7 Tackle Optional Restart

Discussion in 'The Cesspit: Rugby League Discussion' started by Maroon_Faithful, Aug 11, 2017.

Page 2 of 2

  1. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    Nah that's not true. They do police it, just not very consistently. Fact is, if you plant the ball to leverage yourself up you forfeit whatever right to a quick play-the-ball.

    Well done to Cordner though. Typical, power run from him and he milked it well.

    The argument for a penalty imo is that his run resulting in a legs tackle meant Gallen had to release straight away given how these days they punish one-man legs tackles.

    Bit of a moot point anyway because I think Easts deserved to win. Their defence was excellent. Cronulla's attack and last tackle options were quite poor.
     
    Maroon_Faithful, Aug 27, 2017
    #21

  2. Sultan Pepper HG Emm

    I despise the 7 tackle rule. Was brought in to fix a problem that never really existed imo.
     
    Sultan Pepper, Sep 18, 2017
    #22
    Paddy likes this.

  3. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    ^ true fucking that.
     
    Maroon_Faithful, Sep 18, 2017
    #23

  4. Sultan Pepper HG Emm

    The only example I can think of was when Bennett was at St George and got Soward to kick it dead to avoid slater half a decade ago. Was arguing with a mate on the weekend that thinks its good because 'it stops players just kicking it dead' but couldn't point to an example of that being a tactic when I asked him, I actually granted him the Soward/Slater one which he'd forgotten about as it was so long ago and irrelevant.
     
    Sultan Pepper, Sep 18, 2017
    #24

  5. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    A few teams did it to Hayne during his epic year in 09. But you're absolutely right. Massive overreaction to a non-existent problem. I actually argued that I liked the fact they were kicking it dead. To me that is sound tactical play and absolutely no different to kicking it over the sideline. Are any of these people in favour of 7 tackle sets when Kickers drill it over the touch line? Isn't that 'negative play'?

    The whole thing is a joke imo. There's no contested scrums any more so why disincentivise kicking for field position even more? Are people happier now we have a thousand mid-field bombs every game? I think it's shit.
     
    Maroon_Faithful, Sep 18, 2017
    #25

  6. Julian BJ Taylor

    Agreeing with you. We need to stop changing fucking rules all the time. Deadset the only positive rule change that's been implemented in the modern era is the 40/20.
     
    Julian, Sep 19, 2017
    #26
    Paddy and Sultan Pepper like this.

  7. Boobidy BJ Gemmell

    We need to update that to allow 50/10 etc
     
    Boobidy, Sep 19, 2017
    #27

  8. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    Yep totally agree. If they're gonna give 7 tackle sets then they need to incentivise tactical kicking to the corners/sidelines.
     
    Maroon_Faithful, Sep 19, 2017
    #28

  9. Sultan Pepper HG Emm

    What is everyones thoughts on this? At times Ive thought this, but even leaving it as it is, a player kicking a 30/20 is only a 50m kick, which is more than doable. Needing to be inside the 40 makes it accessible from just inside your own half, all the way back to 25m out from your try line.


    I think changing it to 50/10, 30/30, 20/40. 10/50 would really change the dynamics of the game. I guess it would make things more attacking, the wingers would have to stay back more often, encouraging more expansive play.
     
    Sultan Pepper, Sep 22, 2017
    #29

  10. AVA T Delonge

    Not a fan of the 50/10. It's less risky if you fuck it up, but still requires just as much defence from the wingers to prevent it from occuring.
     
    AVA, Sep 22, 2017
    #30

  11. Paddy P Orr

    Don't mind it being left as it is. Too many favourable things for the attacking side as it is.
     
    Paddy, Sep 22, 2017
    #31

  12. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    No it's not. It's more risky because the touch in-goal/dead ball line comes into play and thus the 7 tackle restart.
     
    Maroon_Faithful, Sep 22, 2017
    #32

  13. AVA T Delonge

    I was thinking more finding touch without making the distance/not finding touch and the ball being returned is less punishing as you can still trap them in their own end. True that touch in-goal is a risk.
     
    AVA, Sep 22, 2017
    #33

  14. Julian BJ Taylor

    Agreed on this thinking.

    40/20 only IMO. As I said above we need to stop tinkering with and implementing new rules.
     
    Julian, Sep 27, 2017
    #34

  15. Cribbage RG Cribb

    Finding touch 25 out from inside your own 40 is still a pretty decent result. It's not a win but it's not a loss either.
    Conceding a seven tackle set from the 20 when you're just behind halfway is a horrible result though.
     
    Cribbage, Sep 28, 2017
    #35

  16. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    Bump.

    *sigh. Just get rid of it for the love of god. It’s absolute aids.
     
    Maroon_Faithful, Feb 26, 2018
    #36
    Paddy likes this.

  17. jazman84 JM Eightyfour

    Yep. Hate it.
     
    jazman84, Feb 26, 2018
    #37

  18. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    Gonna have a nice little whinge about it every week so you've all been warned. :p

    The disappearance of the driven long kick into the in-goal is one of the biggest mistakes in rugby league law-making that I can remember.

    7 and a half matches in and I'm over the fucking bombs already. It's fucking shite.
     
    Maroon_Faithful, Mar 11, 2018
    #38
    Paddy likes this.

  19. Sultan Pepper HG Emm

    Preach
     
    Sultan Pepper, Mar 12, 2018
    #39
Page 2 of 2

Share This Page