I like the free play rule a good rule change similar to success of 40-20 rule.

I am indifferent about the number of subs.

Stop clock will just encourage more players to fake injuries to stop the clock and its an awful idea, refs should just start penalizing deliberate time wasting like they used to.

Golden point no thanks, nothing wrong with a draw and watching your side snatch a draw from the jaws of defeat feels like a win and is exiting enough. plus on Friday evening games, extra time means some people will miss trains buses etc. we need more games actually finishing on something like time games from kick off are already getting from around 90 mins (half time plus stoppages) to nearly 2 hours.

not a fan of the 7 tackle rule if ball goes dead in goal, if it goes straight dead without bouncing maybe , but feel a side attempting a pin point kick into the in goal trying to get a drop our or score a try and it rolls out by a foot or so, unfairly get punished, these type of kicks should be encouraged as attacking kicks.

by my reading of the table there were 4 draws in the 2018 regular season, meaning golden point would only have been used in 2.9% of games, to me it just extends the last 5-10 mins of a game where teams are trying for drops goals anyway! I suppose the entertainment value and quality of rugby is then quite subjective!

I suppose one benefit would be that British players may become marginally better at situations where a drop goal is required. I remember us looking clueless in extra time of the 2014 WCC, whereas Sydney basically were far more composed and direct.

Exactly, The amount of draws is minimal so why the need for Golden Point.

I would abolish all forms of goal-kicking. 4 points for a try, bonus point for a try scored from your own half. By and large, games won by the team that scores the most tries. Maybe some other tinkering to make tries more valuable when scored via entertaining play and less valuable from diving over from 2 metres out.

It's strange how things change. The original definition of a try was that it enabled teams to have a "try" at scoring a goal. Games were decided by the number of goals scored, with no points for the try itself.

Rugby is a game of attrition and territory, and building pressure to score from 2 metres out should be just as valid (if not as entertaining) as the 90 metre try that passes through 10 pairs of hands.

The 7 tackle rule for the ball going dead was to stop teams hoofing the ball 70 metres up-field and making the opposition restart against a set defence from the 20 metre line. I'd prefer a tweak where a kick from inside the defending 40 was 6 tackles instead of 7.

No need for golden point. Daft idea (imo), and I'd prefer a golden try to decide cup matches (or potentially any combination of point-scoring that adds up to 4 points or more).

The free play is good, and encourages some entertaining play. Teams need to be coached to deal with it properly though. I hate it when (my own team!) have a free play, throw the ball about and gain 20-30 metres, and then decide on a speculative kick or risky pass that goes awry. Just take the territorial advantage that the free play has given you rather than thinking you have to score from it!

Good point regarding the play of the ball . I can’t recall the exact year but at the start of one season the RFL clamped down on the play on the ball , however it didn’t last long . Along with the offside offence it is easily punished ,just keep penalising the offending team and then it’s the captains job to sort his side out .

And another thing the officials don’t pick up on iis a drop out behind the sticks nearly all players take it on or over the line. Once again it’s simple , penalise It .

Yeah, I'd be happy with that. Quite like a draw in RL.

Are you advocating 3 points for winning? If not, then the cynical would say that it would be worth "agreeing" for a draw, take the point each, and then battle for the extra bonus point in extra time.

I can’t see Sky being happy with the Golden Point, the games already over run. If the away team earn a draw they should keep it.

Inform the refs to be less tolerant with obvious time wasting.

I can’t see Sky being happy with the Golden Point, the games already over run. If the away team earn a draw they should keep it.

Inform the refs to be less tolerant with obvious time wasting.

How? If a player goes down injured, they have to act accordingly, regardless of whether they think it's genuine or not. They have a duty of care.

Didn't fax once do that in early 90s with fev ? Not sure it would happy nowadays

At the start of season 2018 the NRL announced a clampdown on 2 areas-- at the play the ball, play the ball with the foot( or at least make a genuine attempt to do so ) and the 10 metre/offside rule particularly when defending within the 20 metre zone(eg.one foot on the line across the whole defence line). The second was abandoned about a third of the way into the season when penalty counts blew out massively in some games and supporters,pundits, commentators and journalists said the game was being ruined as a spectacle by enforcing the rule.

The clampdown on playing the ball with the foot was a success and lasted the whole season-- stark difference between watching NRL and SL is in this rule with the ball hardly ever touching the foot in SL.

Finally to your earlier comment on 1 point each for a draw and another for the winner in a GP shootout. It was advanced by a few well respected pundits(including Peter Sterling). Didn't carry through,however, as people didn't take to the concept of 3 points for GP games and 2 for the vast majority of others.

It was the 85-86 season you're thinking of, where there were (unsubstantiated) calls made that the second half didn't quite make 40 minutes. Fax needed a point to win the league and Fev needed a point to be sure of avoiding relegation. It was a pretty awful game iirc, but I certainly don't recall that the teams appeared to be playing for a draw. The game finished 13-13.

I was at the game had my stopwatch on it did finish a bit early but nothing like the time alleged another urban myth like the one stating Fax played a full team of Aussies in one match

Exactly how it works in the NHL I believe.

Are these SL rules changes or RFL rule changes?

Not sure mate, I wish someone would clarify that.

One rule I'd like to see brought in is that if a player goes down injured when a drop out is conceded and the referee has to call the game to a halt then that player must leave the field for 2 sets to receive treatment.

Superleague changes they have asked the RFL to incorporate them into the on field ruling document.

Cheers

So refs will be using two different sets of rules if they're in SL one week and Championship the next?

Great.

Surely this means we now need a real divide in the referee's?

Not really, it's not that complicated.

Not forgetting Gansons interpretation.