Replies

  • Be a good idea for the game.
    • Why take away the reward for a hard working, well-structured defensive unit by allowing a 20-40 to be kicked? You're rewarding the team who COULDN'T GET OUT of their own 20 metre zone with another set from the scrum 10 metres into enemy territory. UNBELIEVABLE.

      • Anything that adds unpredictability to the game is a good thing. You’re not gonna see guys going for 20-40’s every set because there is still an element of risk, but as the article suggests, wingers will have to sit back a bit deeper more often which will open more attacking opportunities for a team coming out of its own end.

      • NRL should've trialled Peter Sterling's idea. After receiving a penalty, if you want a fresh set of 6, YOU TAKE A TAP ON THE SPOT. But if you choose to kick for touch, YOUR TACKLE COUNT CONTINUES from where the tackle count was when you received your penalty.

        • Peter Sterling said a few years ago; "Kicking for touch PLUS re-starting your set is TOO MUCH ADVANTAGE in the modern game".

          • Problem with that is teams would be more likely to give away penalties to rest their defensive line.  It already occurs however if you lessen the consequences then teams will risk a strip penalty to try and get the ball.

            • Yep. The other alternative would be to increase the value of a penalty goal to 3 points.

    • How many you actually think will get the chance to do it? It's just like a 40/20, if a team is good enough to do it they should be rewarded. As Brett says it will add to the unpredictability of the game.
      • "Unpredictability"? Yeah, after you kick a 20-40 or 40-20, it's really unpredictable who's gonna win the scrum when it's YOUR FEED ;)

        • Yes, but if teams know they have to defend the 20-40 they won’t be able to rush up in defence quite so aggressively. Right now, unless it’s the 5th there is no incentive to kick the ball from inside your own 20, this will provide the incentive, which in turn opens other opportunities.

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

EA replied to adnan's discussion Pre-Season Challenge, R2: Game day blog vs Sharks
"Your Casey Mclean/Makisini is Lorima Seuseu in HM. 16 this year and you can just tell with him the sky is the limit. Centre/Fullback also in the warratahs accademy.
Defense is Twiddle weakness. "
18 seconds ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Picking Up Where We Left Off?
"We looked "connected" is what I took from the game.
Players on, players off, didn't matter the connection remained.
We may well still get our arses handed to us by better "cattled" sides but if we can stay connected we are going to make it as hard…"
4 minutes ago
Poppa replied to adnan's discussion Pre-Season Challenge, R2: Game day blog vs Sharks
"In those days Teencum's Dad's name was Glasscock, he changed it to Brown because he was being told you could see him coming. ...................Sorry Fishy, with your Avatar that is probably unfair!

 "
9 minutes ago
Gucci replied to adnan's discussion Pre-Season Challenge, R2: Game day blog vs Sharks
"Team was great. Massive amount forward depth. Backs looks like we have firmed up spots too. Honestly. I don't think we see a signing unless it's a big fish. Goal is to lock down these young guns on longer term deals for coin they are worth, ward off…"
10 minutes ago
More…