Some alteration to the rules down under. www.nrl.com/nrl-rule-changes--sc ... fault.aspx 8 Minutes per match forming the scrum, how long in Union, must be treble that.

Some alteration to the rules down under. www.nrl.com/nrl-rule-changes--sc ... fault.aspx 8 Minutes per match forming the scrum, how long in Union, must be treble that.

Not sure about that, seems designed to generate more penalties. Happy with the current set up where the ref stops the clock as soon as one team is ready to pack down.

Will this actually save any time? On average how many scrums take place in every game?

I agree with the rule change regarding drop outs, in fact I would go further by reducing it to 20 seconds.

I think rule change regarding restarting scrums is just pathetic. If there was a need to alter this then as soon as the ref blows his/her whistle and marks where the scrum to be formed, the clock should stop.

I think they're both daft and unnecessary rules, made even more daft by being introduced/changed mid-season.
Making a complicated game even more complicated is not a recipe for success

I like the sound of the rule changes and can not see why the negativity towards them. It is clear that they are trying to speed the game up, and how many times has Sinfield (or in the NRL Elnnis) asked a question to waste some time.

i like that we are part of a sport whereby delaying tactics and trends are identified and riles brought in to penalise them, whether at the end of the season or halfway through.

I wish SL would bring in a rule to stop the clock as soon as a try is scored. All this that a player can take a minute annoys me. If there are 10 tries in a match, that means we only really get 70 mins of game time

I did notice on Monday that between about 50 and 70mins there was an awful lot of time when the ball wasn’t in play, im not blaming anyone but there were a few scrums, a couple of injuries, a couple of drop outs and penalties in those 20mins and it just seems as if we didn’t see a whole lot of rugby played during that time. So im in favour of these rules, teams bend the rules as far as they can, if you have a slight lead and are under the kosh a bit you will waste a bit of time and try and get a bit of a rest, this just kind of formalises the time you can take and gives the ref a bit more power.

Agree Sinfield likes to have a word with the Ref, however no more than any other team captain does

I agree with these changes in principal, might be sone issues as there are with any rule changes.

I dont see why the clock isnt stopped as soon as play is tbh. Ball out of touch stop the clock. Same for everything.

I don't know. There's something about too much action. A time to reflect and gain perspective on what's going on as the match progresses is understated. Plus players need breathers, and an allowance to regroup occasionally, as do fans.

Only time will tell if the rule changes will be a success or not, but my initial reaction is that they are both pretty pointless and could potentially penalise what has previously been seen as good play.

How many times have we all cheered our own teams when they have banged a relieving kick into touch late in a game to take a few seconds off the clock. The ref usually stops the clock anyway if it's taking too long and I can't remember it ever been a serious issue with regards to constant time wasting.

I find the drop out change particularly puzzling. If an attacking team cannot score a try, forcing a drop out is generally seen as the next best thing, but now they'll have to sprint back into position to be ready for the drop out within 30 seconds. This could lead to problems for the attacking team, especially late in a game and feels a little bit like good play could be penalised.

This, the players aren't machines and taking away a few vital seconds here and there that do not detract in any way from the game will be putting them in potential danger, especially with the downsizing of the interchange.
Stop fecking about with things too much and just play the bloody game.
And who wants 10 tries in a game all the time ffs, 10 minutes lost isn't actually 10 minutes lost when you are having a try every 8 minutes.
Takes a few seconds for players to walk back after a try anyway, then opposition to walk from behind sticks to halfway, kicker placing the ball, ref making sure everyone is onside. it all takes some time in any case.
As for scrums surely this is a natural part of the game, stopping the clock all the time isn't on IMO unless there is deliberate time wasting.

I used him and Ennis as examples as they were the ones that sprung to mind mainly due to commentators. Whether I have noticed it more because of it is up for debate.

Why don't they bring a rule to stop rule changes every year, it should only be done every 5 years or so,so players and fans can get used to them

and whats wrong with every 5 days?