: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:26 pm  

Dico wrote:

I've said for years get rid of the 'markers not square'rule. annoys me no end.

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:29 pm  

Industria Ditat wrote:

So you think kicking for goal should be taken out of the game altogether?

Eurob0y wrote:

Why? Its the rules. SO being high tackled and kicking the penalty wouldnt be a cop out?

well, no. what i said was that a penalty from a high tackle could be kicked. I just think 2 points stemming from an offside, markers not square or holding down is a bit of a cop out.

Eur0boy wrote:

How do you draw the line on what should and should not be awarded a penalty?

everything would still be a "penalty" but there'd be two categories.

Category 1: Holding down, offside, markers not square, interference at the play the ball, ball stealing

Category 2: Punching, high tackle, violent conduct

You could only kick for touch or goal from a category two offence.

It's just an idea!

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:31 pm  

Jemaine Clement wrote:

well, no. what i said was that a penalty from a high tackle could be kicked. I just think 2 points stemming from an offside, markers not square or holding down is a bit of a cop out.

everything would still be a "penalty" but there'd be two categories.

Category 1: Holding down, offside, markers not square, interference at the play the ball, ball stealing

Category 2: Punching, high tackle, violent conduct

You could only kick for touch or goal from a category two offence.

It's just an idea!

dont worry its a great idea.

some people just struggle with change

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:32 pm  

Jemaine Clement wrote:

well, no. what i said was that a penalty from a high tackle could be kicked. I just think 2 points stemming from an offside, markers not square or holding down is a bit of a cop out.


everything would still be a "penalty" but there'd be two categories.

Category 1: Holding down, offside, markers not square, interference at the play the ball, ball stealing

Category 2: Punching, high tackle, violent conduct

You could only kick for touch or goal from a category two offence.

It's just an idea!

thats just gonna complicate things even more.

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:33 pm  

in the circumstance described above wouldnt it be classed as a professional foul anyway? punishable by a penalty and sinbinning

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:35 pm  

Holty wrote:

thats just gonna complicate things even more.

yes at first probably

but i think we'd get used to it eventually. the idea of two markers and a defensive line ten yards back seemed tricky originally!

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:36 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

in the circumstance described above wouldnt it be classed as a professional foul anyway? punishable by a penalty and sinbinning

which circumstance do you mean?

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:37 pm  

Holty wrote:

thats just gonna complicate things even more.

why, soccer has red card / yellow card.

basically unless its a violent conduct you cant kick for touch.

its very simple.

endless penalties ruin a game.

the best part of the game is when it just flows without stoppages

a game can build up nice momentum and its great to watch

you get endless stupid penalties and it makes the game stop start.

especially when its for a penalty for a minor infringement

we want to have a game which flows, not something which allows referress to get involved.

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:41 pm  

Or maybe if teams were square at marker, got back 10 meters and didn't commit high tackles as often the game would flow?

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:42 pm  

Leyther_till_death wrote:

Or maybe if teams were square at marker, got back 10 meters and didn't commit high tackles as often the game would flow?

if that attitude was around in 1907 we would still be playing rugby union