In the world of limited tackles is this rule really needed any more?

Why do we have an artificial method of handing possession to the opposition when they're already limited to 6 tackles? Why not make the opposition work to gain control of the ball? We have the offside rule to prevent NFL style quarterback passes and the offside rule is more effectively ruled by the officials (and importantly the video ref)

Removing this rule also makes the knock on a non-offence which is an additional benefit.

Thoughts?

Yes it's needed.

You probably spend a lot of time trolling because you have a sad life.

Any need for that?




What that would allow tho is players to throw the ball up forward in the air and allow attacking players to run past the defence. I know you can do it with the boot but much less quick or accurate. Too much of a change to the game to work.

I would have thought that a forward pass would be quite ok now .......... provided that you could prove that players have got away with it previously and not been penalised. Precedent has now been established on all rules across the board.

I'd be happy with the RU interpretation.

Might as well get rid of the 10m rule and offside for the defence. Then we could have a right old free for all.

And get rid of thr ball whilst you're at it......

Maybe you should start watching basketball instead of RL?

The person is making their first or second post after registering less than a week ago. The suggestion is one which would massively alter the game and take years for the players to get used to. IMO the guy is simply one of the union trolls who's got himself a new handle, so yes, there is a need for it.

Tim Roby got rid of it in the Hull Leeds game

But would it massively alter the game? Do you envisage players deliberately passing forwards on every tackle just because they can?
I suspect that it would more likely be used in a similar fashion to a kick, on the last tackle or tactically when a clever half back spots a badly organised defence he can target.

Do you think it would be impossible to defend and games would routinely finish with scores in the hundreds? If so, why? Certainly teams would have to alter their defensive strategies to account for it which I expect would lead to more attacking options and more entertaining rugby but I don't believe scorelines would be fundamentally changed.

For the record, this is more a theoretical discussion in whether the game could be played without the rule. It's not an implementation meeting at the RFL so we don't need to consider how long players and coaches would take to get used to it. In fact I'm not even proposing it gets introduced into full RL but possibly a shorter, free flowing version of the game like 9's.