I think there's merit in the scrum rule. Too many teams just trundle a second row up at first receiver which doesn't entertain anyone. An extra attacker would see more enterprise.

The 40m tap is harsh. There would be an inch between what is the best kick in the world and a kick being severely detrimental to your own side. Kickers would pull kicks up short from their own half which would result in the fullback taking the ball with ease and making it back to around the 40m line anyway.

A charge down is an optional risk and I feel the rule is fine as it stands. You aren't forced to charge down and people know the 'extra set' rule before they go for it. No need to change this.

Looking forward to seeing how they work anyway.

Happened at Leeds today. Paul McShane put in a lovely kick from just inside the own half that split the winger and full back, but took two big hops forward and rolled dead.

Wakefield got an extra 20m ground out of a kick being a couple of yards too heavy. If he had belted it straight down the full back's throat, he would probably have been tackled around the 30m mark.

imo the new charge down rule is aimed at defenders actually trying to attack the ball rather than attacking the kicker, as such giving the kicker better protection and also allowing for a dummy kick and run. which can only be a good thing.

Also, there was an incident when a Rhinos kick on the last tackle came of the Wakefield players leg and went into touch, which was a scrum feed to Leeds (just as it would have been last season), had the ball bounced back into a Leeds players hands it would still have been the last tackle, but Leeds gained a scrum on the Wakefield "40".

FWIW, although there will be moments when the ball trickles "dead", it looks like a positive rule change and will prevent the hpoefull "hoof" upfield.

Don't really like the idea of any of them. You very really see teams hoofing it completely dead on purpose. OK some trickle dead when the oppositions tries a clearing kick, but that's part of the game. 40m is too much IMO. What's the difference between someone kicking it out dead from a clearing kick and someone deliberately kicking it into touch?

Aimless kicks to the corner resulting in a try is probably the worse way to score a try IMO

Aimless kicks to the corner resulting in a try is probably the worse way to score a try IMO, no skill.

Like this. It will discourage aimless hoofs down the field.


I also like this. It will mean that pressuring the kick is a win-win situation.

I don't like the sound of that, at all.

Tell you what, take a ball out onto a local pitch and stand 10 metres in from touch on one side, around the 20 metre line.

Now try to kick the ball so it lands in a five metre square patch of grass in the opposite corner. It has to be in the air long enough that someone who was stood behind you could run forward and catch it before it lands.

Try it 20 times, and come back to us with how many landed exactly where you wanted them to with the right amount of time in the air. Then tell me there's no skill involved in cross-field kicks.

What's the new advantage rule?

Said by someone who has clearly never played the game. If you have it was probably as a prop, the Paleaaesina kind.

You try and do it and see what success rate you come back with.

Ade Gardner's try for St Helens against Leeds in March (46-6), the leap by Gardner made that try, it was perfect...the kick by Roby however wasn't great and quite a desperate play on the last. It's about the recipient of the kick, and the how the opposition's defence deals with it, not really about the kick itself.

Its still got to land in the right place, though,and in order to make it hard to take, you need to get height on it.

1. Nope, it penalises the 'attacking' team too much when the vageries of a bounce/pitch divots/swirling winds can mean the ball pulling up way short of the try line or bouncing miles over for similar power/directioned kicks.
Trying to put back rotation on a ball to hold it up and get distance over 35-40m is extremely difficult without having a player charging you down if no.2 gets the go-ahead

2. So if a defender charges down, the ball goes back toward the attackers goal line 25m and they recover it on the last, isn't the risk for open kicking massively more riskier. Will we be seeing the offside rule tightened up because that will just be a joke situation with some teams already infringing the 10 by a few yards, more so at the back end of a game..

3. Again, if we see defending teams being offside at scrums as has been the case for like forever with virtual impunity having an extra man over won't make a huge amount of difference.
Stop the defending team from moving up so quick, as in enforce the offside rule properly, retiring back the required distance behind the scrum until the ball is out and they'll be space for teams to attack, no need to have an extra loose man.