S
smartcooky
Guest
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (InsaneAsylum @ Aug 12 2009, 01:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
There are a couple of fairly simple solutions to cutting down the amount of stupid and pointless "aerial ping-ping" kicking while still rewarding a really good bomb and still rewarding good tactical kicking. Neither of these solutions involve making wholesale Law changes or legislating kicking out of the game, but a couple minor tweaks to Law technicalities would do the trick.
FIRST: Allow a mark to be taken anywhere inside a player's own half.
This would discourage aimless punting downfield, and cause those players who do so to think a bit more about what they are doing. Rather than simply send a couple of speedsters downfield to knock over the catcher, they will have to compete for the ball in order to prevent the defending player from taking a mark. This also might bring us back to seeing teams kick more tactically, accurately and with greater skill rather then just mindlessly belting the ball back and starting something akin to a game of school yard force-back.
SECOND: When a Free Kick (from a mark or infringement) is taken inside a team's own half, a gain in ground is allowed.
So if you kick downfield from outside your 22, and a mark is taken by an opponent 5m inside his own half, you are likely to find your team competing for possession at a line-out inside your own 22. This would be a real disincentive to those who find it necessary to kick without purpose, and encourage players to try kicking into space or into touch rather then just any old place.
Nothing else needs to be done, Its two simple changes to Laws 18 and 19. They would require the players to increase their kicking and catching skill-levels, while making the game a much more exciting to watch.
I expect some people to be critical of these ideas, especially, there will be those who think the game would become a "series of marks". These people will, of course, have entirely missed the point. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence will quickly work out that this will not happen.
If you wanted to take it further, and be more radical (and I'm not necessarily recommending this, I'm just putting it out there as an idea) you could add a third more substantial change that would further encourage players to kick tactically rather than aimlessly. .
THIRD: Adopt something similar to Rugby League's "40-20" rule
A kick from inside a team's own 10m line that bounces or rolls into touch inside the opponent's 22 gives the line-out throw to the attacking team. Perhaps we could call it the "10-22" kick. Not only would it encourage tactical kicking in the midfield, it would encourage the defending players to pick the ball up rather than allow it to roll into touch.
Finally, one change I would like to see, that South African readers will hate. I would like something done about the dropped goal. I'm not against dropped goals. IMO a well executed dropped goal is worth the three points it gets. Kicking dropped goals is a difficult skill to master (as anyone who's tried it will testify to). What concerns me is that the long distance dropped goal attempt has really become a risk free way of gaining territory. Its a win-win situation for the kicker;
► if you get the DG, its 3 points...so its a win
► if you miss the DG and kick the ball dead or if a defender touches down, you get a drop-out 22, so either
<blockquote>the defending does a short drop-out, and you compete for the ball 20m+ downfield...so its a win, or
the defending team does a long drop-out, so you get the ball back about where you kicked from, so you're no worse off.
</blockquote>► if you don't kick as far as the goal-line, you are likely to be throwing to an attacking line-out, so its a win.
You can see, NO RISK - MUCH REWARD
What I would like to see happen is for the exemption in Law 22.8 for the attempted dropped goal going dead in-goal to be removed. Essentially, this will add some risk to the dropped goal attempt, so instead of a drop out 22, the defending team would have the option of a scrum with their feed at the point where the kick was taken, just like any other kick that went through the in-goal. The further the attempt is from, the more chance there is of missing, the greater the risk of coming back a long way for a scrum.
kicking is boring.
there should be a rule that you can't immediately return a kick if you recieve a kick, unless you run 10 metres or you are tackled or it's a mark. hopefully this will stop the gay aerial ping pong that's being played at the moment[/b]
There are a couple of fairly simple solutions to cutting down the amount of stupid and pointless "aerial ping-ping" kicking while still rewarding a really good bomb and still rewarding good tactical kicking. Neither of these solutions involve making wholesale Law changes or legislating kicking out of the game, but a couple minor tweaks to Law technicalities would do the trick.
FIRST: Allow a mark to be taken anywhere inside a player's own half.
This would discourage aimless punting downfield, and cause those players who do so to think a bit more about what they are doing. Rather than simply send a couple of speedsters downfield to knock over the catcher, they will have to compete for the ball in order to prevent the defending player from taking a mark. This also might bring us back to seeing teams kick more tactically, accurately and with greater skill rather then just mindlessly belting the ball back and starting something akin to a game of school yard force-back.
SECOND: When a Free Kick (from a mark or infringement) is taken inside a team's own half, a gain in ground is allowed.
So if you kick downfield from outside your 22, and a mark is taken by an opponent 5m inside his own half, you are likely to find your team competing for possession at a line-out inside your own 22. This would be a real disincentive to those who find it necessary to kick without purpose, and encourage players to try kicking into space or into touch rather then just any old place.
Nothing else needs to be done, Its two simple changes to Laws 18 and 19. They would require the players to increase their kicking and catching skill-levels, while making the game a much more exciting to watch.
I expect some people to be critical of these ideas, especially, there will be those who think the game would become a "series of marks". These people will, of course, have entirely missed the point. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence will quickly work out that this will not happen.
If you wanted to take it further, and be more radical (and I'm not necessarily recommending this, I'm just putting it out there as an idea) you could add a third more substantial change that would further encourage players to kick tactically rather than aimlessly. .
THIRD: Adopt something similar to Rugby League's "40-20" rule
A kick from inside a team's own 10m line that bounces or rolls into touch inside the opponent's 22 gives the line-out throw to the attacking team. Perhaps we could call it the "10-22" kick. Not only would it encourage tactical kicking in the midfield, it would encourage the defending players to pick the ball up rather than allow it to roll into touch.
Finally, one change I would like to see, that South African readers will hate. I would like something done about the dropped goal. I'm not against dropped goals. IMO a well executed dropped goal is worth the three points it gets. Kicking dropped goals is a difficult skill to master (as anyone who's tried it will testify to). What concerns me is that the long distance dropped goal attempt has really become a risk free way of gaining territory. Its a win-win situation for the kicker;
► if you get the DG, its 3 points...so its a win
► if you miss the DG and kick the ball dead or if a defender touches down, you get a drop-out 22, so either
<blockquote>the defending does a short drop-out, and you compete for the ball 20m+ downfield...so its a win, or
the defending team does a long drop-out, so you get the ball back about where you kicked from, so you're no worse off.
</blockquote>► if you don't kick as far as the goal-line, you are likely to be throwing to an attacking line-out, so its a win.
You can see, NO RISK - MUCH REWARD
What I would like to see happen is for the exemption in Law 22.8 for the attempted dropped goal going dead in-goal to be removed. Essentially, this will add some risk to the dropped goal attempt, so instead of a drop out 22, the defending team would have the option of a scrum with their feed at the point where the kick was taken, just like any other kick that went through the in-goal. The further the attempt is from, the more chance there is of missing, the greater the risk of coming back a long way for a scrum.