1. Laughable
2. Why stop here, why not just stop giving penalties all together, rules are there for a reason if you break the rules it should be a penalty!
3. imo the 40/20 rules already penalises good defence so why make it worse by giving the kicker more space to aim for and removing any skill from the kick. If they insist on these rules, I think they should be restricted to only the first 4 tackles to add a tactical element to the kick and not last tackle desperation!

If the offence happens on 0 or 1 tackle then you dont really get any benefit. I understand its purpose and it sounds good, but when you think about it there are too many flawes. The other 2 are just stupid.

The wiping of the tackle count needs a bit of tweaking, in order to allow a team to quickly choose if they want to take the full penalty instead. I couldn't see if the ref(s) were signalling the penalties on TV, if they weren't they need to.

Other than that it does speed up the game and punishes wrestling techniques.

That's what I was aiming at when I posted this.

Power play was bull- but I think the penalty awarded with a play on back to zero could have something if they tinker with it.

With the 40/20 and last nights 50/30 or whatever it was, why not just have that kick from anywhere in your own half as long as you are behind the line and it goes in to touch 40 or whatever metres it is away?

Say you're near the half way line and you kick it out in the oppositions 10, it's the same as a 40/20 anyway isn't it, so the kick is just as skillful as a 40/20.