You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
This reply was deleted.
More stuff to read
"Good points, I would rather just make it scoring team kicks as opposed to letting them choose.
But I don't think anyone here is complaining about kick-offs. Not necessary. NRL saying kick-offs are the issue with momentum but not 6 agains?"
But I don't think anyone here is complaining about kick-offs. Not necessary. NRL saying kick-offs are the issue with momentum but not 6 agains?"
"2 Sportsbet Super Sets....cleanup on aisle 3...Sportbet execs all spontaneously jizzed in their knickers when they read those 4 words"
"6 player bench is an idea I can understand, I think it needs to be tweaked. Like have an extra replacement like 18th man so you can cover all areas but make it slightly easier to activate or have 5 man bench and have 19th man as replacement."
Replies
These rules are good except the kickoff
1. Kick off rule seems unecessary, but not a biggie since it's only an option for the conceding team. Guess we'll see if any teams figure out a way to take advantage of receiving.
2. Bench changes are good. Makes it less punishing to have specialist players if your team gets an injury or HIA.
3. Great change. Teams should never have been punished for nearly scoring. They need to remove the 7 tackle restart from kicks as well to bring back more attacking kicks. Keep it for kicks from outside a certain distance, say 30m, or those that go dead on the full, so teams can't boot it dead.
4. Not a fan. Wasn't the 40m penalty rule brought in because teams would just give a way a six again to reset their line on kick returns?
I agree Sloth, I think 2 and 3 are good changes. Not sold or fussed on the other two.
Meh, ok I s'pose.
Yeah Kickoff one is not overly egregious, but is it necessary? Just creates an added thing where majority of the time the opposition will want the ball as each side always wants.
Rest i have no issues with. Rather just have a 19th man and leave 14-17 as is but it at least makes sense. The kick-off doesn't.
Do you think these extras will back up from reserve grade or be fresh?
If fresh, will clubs now need more halves etc? Can't see many just in case halves playing much if they are just bench warmers. Still a few questions to be had I think.
That's the thing it will be hard in certain areas. Firstly as you mention do the 18th and 19th men need to sit out of NSW cup? If so that's not good for development if they aren't playing most weeks. Coaches wouldn't want to play someone like Joash for 5 mins just to give him minutes as he's missing Cup time.
Another thing is let's say we had a bench of Walker, Moretti, Guymer and Tuivaiti normally right. Then you have Joash and Samrani as 18 and 19. If you Penisini went down HIA, would you bring Samrani on straight away with no certainty if Penisini has a grade 1? Then if he is a grade 2 you have Samrani sit on bench not needed and we don't have someone like Tuivaiti or Guymer who we rather use in the rotation.
It's a good idea in principle, but rather it be 18th man and 19th man so you have two players to come in if needed. Maybe change rules where if a player is ruled out then you can activate extra man. Instead of waiting for 2 HIA's if we lose Penisini we can activate Samrani.
Or just have 18th man on bench and have 4 only allowed to be used so technically you are having same thing but can use your 18th man whenever you like as opposed to waiting for foul play or 2 HIA's.
Also, not a big issue just awkward if you name a debutant on the bench but there is a chance they might not get on the field if there is an injury in a spot like backline.
Like imagine that hahah, here you go mate you might debut off the bench.
They'll waste 5 minutes deciding if the want the ball back or kick off. Stupid idea
Teams will know but shouldn't happen that way. The more I think about it the dumber it is.
Like comebacks won't happen. They want closer games yet this year was the tightest comp I decades.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next