Is anybody else sick of this rule?

E.g: Briers was booting it out tonight and his side were benefiting from an automatic start on our 20m line. All our players then have to get behind the 20m line before play can resume.

Why should we be rewarding such poor skill and such negativity. It's not just tonight, but it's a rule that annoys the hell out of me.

Just adopt the union ruling.

If the kick is within the last 20 I'd kept the rule as it is. If you're over the 20 I think scrum to the defending team from where ever it was kicked from, even though I'm a Wire fan I agree it's a terrible tactic and rule.

Tony Rea got London Broncos to the play-offs in 2005 pretty much on the back of that tactic when playing "bigger/heavier" packs. Making the forwards turn around and jog back 50 yards or so takes it's toll in the end.

What the hell's wrong with some people?

It's yet another technical facet of the game that teams can use to gain an advantage.

We could of course stop all such plays and end up like basketball with two teams trading points

I agree it can be a bit boring sometimes if a team is just booting it dead but I can't see a way around it or a need for a way around it.
If we implement the Union ruling (effectively what Horatio Yed explained) then you run the risk of penalising "good" attempted tactical kicks that just edge a yard too long. With our narrow in-goals in League it's almost impossible to avoid some kicks going dead. That in turn would put players/teams off from attempting the best types of tactical kicks because of the risk of it going dead.
Also a team can defend this type of kick if they wish, by making their back 3 defend deeper and cover the try/dead ball line rather than covering touch. They choose to not defend this.

Kick it from your own half and it goes dead just make it a 40m tap instead.

How about the receiving team actually catch the thing and run with it? They could always put more players back there if they have trouble covering all the field. Don't look for ways to reward them letting the ball go out of play.

As usual the Championship Club fan has the logical answer

I see what you mean, but it's just so frustrating to watch.

It's not a good skill to boot it long. If it was it would be a great advantage for the kicking side, like the 40/20 rule which requires a high level of skill, so it's a good rule.

I like the 40m tap suggestion or maybe the defending team doesn't have to all be back behind the line before they can tap it?

How many of those kicks actually see the defending fullback watch the ball go dead? And you want to give him even more encouragement to do that rather than pick up the ball and run with it?

I agree, the defending team need to field the ball better to nulify the tactic. It was only as it was Briers that it was so effective, Wilkin could not do that.

I'm sure it will get changed for next season.

Every time you kick it dead the opposition should be allowed one shoulder charge

Well none of them last night. Hohaia kicked it too long, Briers smashed the ball dead twice and Grix did too - all in the space of a 5-10min period. Defenders had no chance of getting to it to stop the poor kicks on each occasion.

I'm not sure why you seem adamant to want to reward a poor kick?

There are a lot of RL people who are proud the game is tough and fast, but sometimes that can lead to calls for good footballing tactics to be driven out. The game needs to be careful about what is stopped or discouraged using rule changes.

Sticking more to the thread topic, as others have pointed out, if a team is being disadvantaged by their opponent kicking the ball dead, they should position players to prevent it. If the defending team does that, the team in possession might see an opportunity to run the ball.

As for 20m restarts, are the controlled ones enforced just to help the match officials? If I recall correctly, currently, you can have a quick restart if a player runs it back from out of play to the 20m line but not if they pass or kick it ahead to a player closer. I prefer to see the quick ones for obvious reasons and because I think it's a good balance to the kick dead tactic.

So why did the defending team not put their full back fully back to field the kicks?
I'm not sure why you seem adamant to want to reward poor defence.

Anyone can tap it and whenever, although players can't get involved until back behind the ball. A long throw to a man on the mark and then a good burst would certainly focus minds.

it is a horrible rule it just encourages unimaginative play. I agree what somebody said before about being inside the 10 or 20 then its fair enough but just to keep whacking it as hard as you can to make it run dead just brings substance to the its "just 5 drives and kick game"

Nah, FBs should just stand in the in goal area to prevent any sort of disadvantage for their team that such a tactic brings.

Because it would be entirely unreasonable to expect them to stop it going over the in-goal in the examples that I cited. They would have to be stood in the in-goal area to stop it and that is just not happening when the oppo is kicking from their own half.

If they were particularly bothered about the opposition kicking dead, then they would defend it.

It's a hell of a kick that can go from a players own half, to go dead in the opposition half after bouncing, and be impossible to field unless the defender is already waiting in his in goal area. In all these years, I don't think I've seen a kick that good.

I have got to agree that it is a poor spectacle when a team takes the pace of the game by kicking dead, but I do belive we need to look into slight changes in the way we play. There is very little competition for posession in the game now & play is becoming totaly predictable as players are not challenged mentaly. I would go further than penalising a team for kicking the ball dead I would also penalise a player knocking the ball dead in goal. I want the rules to clearly state that a player must endevour to keep the ball in the field of play & make all efforts to carry the ball out of the in goal area & remain on his feet. We actualy penalise good tackles now, the tackle around the legs is is the safest tackle but we have to go high now to allow our team mates to get back as the player brought down is allowed to dive to the floor jump back to his feet & roll the ball without playing it correctly, all in the name of speeding up the game, we even stoped the markers striking for the ball or the tacklers stripping but have stoped penalising incorrect play the ball moving forward of the mark & voulantry tackles. We insist the defenders get back 10 meters but stoped making the attacking side retreat 5 meters behind the play the ball as used to happen. The other old interpritation that has gone is that players in front of the kicker used to have to stand still untill the kicker put them on side or the attacker got to them not run up & stay 10 meters away as is now the case. I would like to see more challenges for posession reward good play & penalise lazy or negative play.

It's only as 'slow' a restart as your own team makes it. If your players make an effort to get back behind the twenty, your team can then play on. I don't see the problem really, as if you put it over the side line it's no quicker a restart yet that wouldn't be deemed a 'negative' play.

This.

If you don't want your team to have to turn around and run back behind the 20m line, stop the ball from going out!

Exactly it's a tactic of the game, some sides will deliberately target a winger with kicks or use short kicks to keep the ball in play or tire a particular player or whole team. best example of this was grand final 2004 when leeds kicked big les out off the game.. Some use the tactic to save energy knowing, they can defend a good set. Leave it alone its fine.
It's a valid tactic, plus it would stop sides attempting good grubbers in goal which often leads to a dry,drop out, or sometimes just runs dead.

i think its amusing that a saints fan is complaining about it, after getting beaten by a side using it.

Widnes did it to warrington, and hull did it both times they beat us this year, we didn't complain about it.

we also had to endure some saints fans crying about us having the audacity to use a drop goal and how briers was a boring for doing it as we were walking back to the car. the butt hurt was strong, and not a shred of humility about the amount of times long or goulding did it to us, it was ok when they were beating us.

However, rules is rules, sometimes teams click on a method to win and it works and its up to the other teams to try and combat having big off wingers (bradford), running like from dummy half(sintellins),the obstruct like and give it to Sam (wiggin) or passing the ball forwards(leeds).