Anybody buying into these new rule changes.

Watching the Rovers game I thought it gave Ganson a whole new platform to showcase himself as the centre of the universe.

Whilst some of the advantage rulings in our game were a little confusing and allowed the game to go on far too long before bringing it back to the orginal offence.

The advantage rule is now black and white instead of going on how a ref 'feels' about the situation.
Stops 1 ref not giving an advantage where another would and stops a ref blowing early when the team getting the head and feed break up field only to find the ref was a little to keen to blow up.

I understand thats the reasoning behind it but having watched a few games of the new season the black and white you speak of is just as grey if not more so as it ever was.

the human side of decision making in a game enviroment will always be based on individuals interpretation but I felt some of these changes gave these individuals more scope to interfere and disrupt the general flow of the game. IMO obviously.

With the team warning i think it needs to be made clear for how long it lasts,on Saturdays match after Graham Horne had been sin binned,what happens if Rovers then commited another offence in the next set,does another player go to the bin and so on? I don't agree with punishing a team by sin binning a player for what can be totally unrelated offences. The same continued offence then yes.

Yeah, It seemed like an age from Wakefields warning until the sin bin. At one point I think they asked " Are we still on a warning."
Clear as mud imo.

Once Ganson signaled that a team was on a warning you knew he was gonna sin bin someone on the next possible opportunity.

as for the advantage rule, there were a couple of times when we knocked on but Bradford carried on and often Sammut tried a quick kick and chase which went over the dead ball line, a good 25-30 meters from where the knock on happened, if he had scored then it would have been given but because he didn't they brought the play back for a scrum to Bradford. to me this seemed a bit unfair as it gave Bradford a second chance after having initially tried to score off of the knock on straight away

Apparently at half time James Webster asked Ganson if they were still on a warning & he told him they wasn't, thinking that Webster was still at Rovers.

The Square marking is still catching fans out .Fans have forgot that the defending player can now be played on side by one of his own players .

Confused quite a few near us who wer berating the ref for not knowing what he was doing

I like the rule,its like a power play and adds a bit of excitement

the trouble is some fans don't keep up when rules have been changed They cannot be bothered to read the rule changes

I reckon it's the best rule change we have ever had. the opposing team gets an oppotunity to try something outrageous which would never normally be risked all in the knowledge that they will still have the advantage on restart if it does not come off.

That is the rule and the point.
A team have 1 play to try anything they want knowing they will get the ball back anyway.
If should lead to lots of good tries.

In the Sammut kick situation i think once the ball is kicked you should also kick your advantage away. Just like it is in Union. For example if he had scored it would stand, but if he had knocked it on it would be our ball

Dont think they automatically kick the advantage away in union as they often kick it dead to force the ref into giving the penalty. Ours will be far easier to understand, one play to get something out of it or start again from scratch. Union advantages can drag on and on until the ref gets bored.

wasn't aware of this, they made a point of highlighting some of the rule changes and trialing them in friendlies i must have missed this change, did think it was odd that Sammut was kicking immediately after we knocked on but i understand now