7 tackle set.

The seven tackle set needs to be changed to be only on long kicks perhaps when the kicks is before half way. It gives the other team way to much of an advantage for a minor mistake. Stupid rule needs to be changed.

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • I've never liked the 7 tackle set! It should be scraped form the game altogether.
  • agree, the rule was brought in to prevent people like soward deliberately kicking it dead to keep players like hayne out of the game. shouldn't apply to inside 20 sets

  • Should be 6 tackles though out the game no more no less.
  • Completely agree. Dropping a grubber in goal that happens to take 1 roll too many and just go out should not be penalised to the extent that it is. 1 roll too many should not equate to the opposition attacking your line 1.5 mins later.

    The rule was brought in to stop the deliberate big down town kicks out the back to slow things down. As per usual, the NRL fail dismally in their application. Like many things though... it's an easy fix but one the incompetent gronks at NRL will just not be able to get their head around.

    I'd say inside the 20 is fine - normal 6 tackle set. Outside 20 - leave the 7 rule if they have to.

  • The other shite rule is when a team holds it in the scrum and gets an offside penalty. Their side also broke it should just be a re pack
    • Yeah the refs showed the lack of scrum understanding with that one.
  • I was thinking this same thing through the whole game. It was brought in to punish teams (generally with big kickers) from kicking on their own 40 or from halfway, dead in goal to get a set to restart with a straight line in defence 20 out.

    There are several instances a team shouldn't get a 7 tackle set:
    A grubber kick that rolls slightly long
    A missed field goal
    Knock on in goal
    Any kick close to the goal line that bounces dead.

    It's bloody ridiculous to be punished with a 7 tackle sets in these situations. We were both on the receiving end and beneficiaries of this tonight, but it's terrible for the game either way.

    The only reason/s to be given a 7 tackle set should be:
    A kick further than 40 out from the goal line that goes dead
    Catch a ball on the full in the in-goal (I'm still not even sure if this should be a 7 tackle set though if it's from close to the goal). Maybe only if this is from further than 40 out too.
  • The modern game is all about momentum. The quicker BA gets Guth away from the halfs the better. His kicking has been shit all year
    • I can't watch every time he gets the ball on the last. He is not a natural kicker.
    • Hopefully he will be at the back when Norman returns
This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Randy Handlinger replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Iongi: Recent Illicit Substance Scandals vs NRL Sanctions
"Got any priors for players done for weed. I don't recall any.
Unlike weed, everything on that list is a class A. drug.
 "
19 minutes ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"Thanks Pato. It's 4o4. Does it say Tripp has not been asked to appear on the first? They can't make him but they can tear him up without reply if he doesn't attend
 "
25 minutes ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Hell On Eels's discussion The Eels v Lomax: Timeline and Key Questions
"Yeah Super, that's what I thought.
Pato was saying "unavailable to appear until 13th March. So Lomax won't be playing for Storm until Rd3 at the earliest if they get a result in their favour."
I thought he was saying it had been moved to 13th
 "
27 minutes ago
ParraPride replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Iongi: Recent Illicit Substance Scandals vs NRL Sanctions
"He'll be fine it seems like an old picture."
31 minutes ago
More…