sounds like it could be worrth the debate, can't see many people going for it apart from when its a touchline conversion / really windy / no kicker on the field.

As for the interchanges before it, thats far too much American Football and would slow the came, so a bit no!

Bad idea. Some games one team would only touch the ball to kick off.

How do they recieve the ball and is it just for 1 tackle?

Sounds stupid to me.

What happens should a defending player intercept the ball? I like new ideas, and it's fun to try them, but my first reactions to this one are not positive.

I think it means that on the next set instead of getting 6 tackles you get 7, like when receiving the ball from a knock on

That's not how I read it. It reads to me like you get one tackle in opposition territory after a try, which allows you to add 4 pointys rather than the 2 you would get from the kick. Similar to the 2 point conversion in NFL.

Hmmm, could be that I suppose. Sounds even sillier to me

It's not very clear at all is it, if it's one last tackle with no kicks from a drop out or restart then I think I would take the two everytime unless you were 7 or 8 behind obviously.

If you scored from that extra tackle, would you get the option again next time?

The main reasons the aussies want 4 refs (and 2 video refs) is to lengthen the game, freeing up commercial time opportunities for the sponsors to try and sell their wares.

One of the obvious problems for me:

If they are trying to get away from kicking goals, but all they will achieve is another form of kick with either: Bomb/ Grubber / Chip.

The defence will be clued up, they will have a set line, so you shouldn't let a try in. Which I think will end up with a big boot to the in-goal area.

Pat Richards would be pleased mind.