Looks like Phil Clarke has got his way on that second one. Personally, I like it when a group of defenders don't complete the tackle so they can drag a guy into touch. On the other hand, if it encourages wingers to take a chance on the outside it will be no bad thing.

Don't like either to be honest, I can understand the leg lift to a certain extent, but being pushed or dragged back i feel is part of the game, its part and parcel of winning the collision, and dominating it.

I agree, both are not required - more technical infringements - more like RU than ever.

On the first case I can see defenders deliberitely lifting a players leg so that the tackle is called held to prevent the tackled player off-loading the ball - or the tackled player lifting his leg as soon as contact is made with his leg so as to try and win a penalty. Seems a pointless change to me.

On the second I agree with the previous posters - it is part of the game and is a reward for a good defensive effort - why stop it? It is not as though it happens a lot in a game.

You can imagine someone as picky as Stuart Cummins being right behind it. I truly wish we could get that fella OUT of rugby league once and for all.

We are moving further an further away from being a game of rugby and even closer to being a glorified game of British Bulldog

Don't like either of them, it won't speed up the game - just simply result in more penalties.

When the OP said the game would get quicker, I was praying the RFL had finally got rid of the controlled restart and we could continue the flow of the game amongst penalties and tap restarts.

it wont stop the dominant tackler/s 'driving' a player backwards , the word is 'dragging' .

to me that implies the use of the shirt etc

Just thinking about this some more, just say there's a kick into the ingoal area, the defender tries to get out and a couple of players drag him back. That's now a penalty?!

Next year's interpretation...

As soon as someone touches the attacking player and shouts either "TICK, YOU'RE IT", or "BRITISH BULLDOG, 1 2 3", then the referee will call "held" and the tackle will be completed.

Stuart Cummings is an idiot who makes up these type of pointless rules to jusity his wages and position within the RFL IMO.

It reminds me of the season in the early 90s - not sure which one exactly - when a ruling was made that any contact with the ball-carrying player at all after the ref had shouted 'held', no matter how slight, was deemed to be an infringement. The season was a penalty-a-thon for the first five weeks, after which the referees took it on themselves to ignore the ruling because it was totally ridiculous.

Mind you, now and then it is resurrected - a la Silverwood with us at KR a couple of Good Fridays ago.

These rules move us in my opinion down the line of American Football, ie whatever gain you make going forward to contact is the actual meter gain and the defence can do very little to prevent that momentum, i love attacking flowing rugby but if these rules stringently followed I think we will see some big scores next year which is not good for the game.

The rule states that if there is only one defender in attendance therefore the 1 on 1 dragging/driving backwards appears to be ok.

No it's never a penalty, it's a call of held (tackle complete)

And it's only a held call if the guy with the ball has a team mate join in, otherwise they can drive him back.

People need to read the text at the bottom of the article.

jonh, read the text at the bottom, they can drive you back fine. It's just a change to call held when a team-mate of the ball carrier joins in.

On the lifting the leg front, i'd imagine deliberately raising the leg will see the ball carrier penalised for foul play