I don't know if this has been debated on here before, but maybe it is time to change the rule that allows the team with the ball to kick it dead in goal over their opponants try line. This results in the defending team restarting the game with a tap on the twenty metre line. Surely the play should restart from where the ball is kicked from, thus discouraging negative tactics. If the ball is kicked dead in goal inside the twenty metres then the game should restart from the twenty metre line as it does now.

Not dismissing the idea, but I feel there are other, dafter rules that need to be changed first. Don't forget referees (and fans alike) can only concentrate on one rule change at a time

Change the rule like that dirty little scroat deliberately trapping your arm under the ball and then getting a penalty from it, its deliberate cheating and the team that does it should have to hand over the ball to the opposition at the point that it happens!!!!

That will soon stop them ***tards

The rule that i would change, which IMO will have the biggest impact across the board and make it a fairer game,is....



If a player is put on report or sent off, and then banned, he should be banned for the games against the team in which the offence was commited.



There are numerous times where a man is stretchered off and then the week later another team gets the benefit of their opposition missing a player while the victims team suffers.



It wont be hard to police, and should the player involved not play that opposition again that season, or is being transferred or retiring, then a ban should start as they have it now.



The way the ruling is now, the victim and the victims team benefit in NO WAY WHATSOEVER for an offence committed against them.

So Jammer plays against Warrington at the weekend, smashes Briers with a forearm to the face, breaking his jaw. Wire go out in the next round as a result.



Jammer gets a 12 match ban, but plays in a grand final win against Wigan and serves out the ban in 2 games stints over 6 years against Wire.



Sounds like a great plan.

Yes with regards to the above

I guess the problem with that is that the punishment then might benefit the 'victim's' team but it does not have the desired negative effect on the perpetrator's team as a whole. Which is part of the point of a suspension, it is not only to punish the player but their team as a whole.



Spreading out the punishment effectively makes the punishment softer in the long run.

I think it would make it softer i agree, but imagine (no offence intended here) Salford had a player took out and injured for a dangerous tackle. Their player is out for however many games, and they would be badly affected, whereas the offender would miss the next two games, benefitting Salford in no way whatsoever while theyre left with a player left out injured and a small squad with no real decent replacement.

The offenders team in their next to games, could be two lesser teams, and they could afford to rest that offending player anyway so its no skin off their nose.



There are a lot of ifs and buts involved and describing stupid and unreal circumstances like Fear The Vee did (what fear the vee didnt think was that if Jammer did that he would be straight red carded and saints would get beat that match...i hope lol, and warrington would have a decent enough replacement for Briers in the next game).



I just think it makes sense and the victims wouldnt feel so hard done to.

Id change the rules so that when Wire play Saints they get 7 tackles per set to give them a chance and make the game interesting.

The dragging into touch rule i hate, change it back.

This I definitely do agree with.



There is no incentive for the player to try and remain on the field because nine times out of ten they get a penalty = a terrible rule.

aww bless bet it took you ages to think of that one