A game of 4 quarters?

[TheLoneRooster]

So, let me get this straight. Change the game to four quarters to artificially create more opportunities for ads which will likely reduce the appeal of the game to the fans the ads are trying to reach? Killing the goose that lays the golden eggs much? And I had such high hopes for v'Landys.

[Thirteen]

So, let me get this straight. Change the game to four quarters to artificially create more opportunities for ads which will likely reduce the appeal of the game to the fans the ads are trying to reach? Killing the goose that lays the golden eggs much? And I had such high hopes for v'Landys.

Yes it’s like snoring coke up your arse hole .

[Mickie Lane]

Taking fatigue and momentum out of the game. A massive no from me!!

That was a done a while ago when they introduced the interchange rule.

[ism22]

Absolute joke, changing the game without any real benefit to the game.
changing it simply because the TV bosses want it

I don't get why all he rule changes seem to be unnecessary BS rather than incremental adjustments as needed (e.g. we're seeing 20/40's and 'eeeer fukk it, it was a drafting error not a rule change, but we will keep allowing that stupid strip thing that the Storm/Canberra do').

IMO unless there is a need or strong desire from the community, the rules shouldn't change (especially not every year).

I reckon their interpretation/drafting techniques are shyte. You shouldn't need minor adjustments every year to say 'blah blah blah is now classified as dangerous'. There are already rules to deal with dangerous/contrary conduct and I reckon it makes reffing easier if you simplify things + give refs the power to sort out what's reckless/negligent. I mean think of DV... an 'assault' can be ANYTHING that makes somebody feel scared. Courts don't waste a lot of time working out whether some wife beater's actions fell within a list of banned actions... they look at whether they intentionally, negligently or recklessly caused fear of harm. An example of useless prescriptive lists is Japanese law... for example when they banned prostitution and paedophilia they defined sex as coitus. Thus, they had to go back and expressly ban people from offering minors money for anal sex and blowjobs. Now people just pay for 'dates' instead... 'oh yeah, we're going on a date'. This is exactly what the NRL do with their rules because they are a bunch of idiots! Rather than trying to figure out whether a blowjob is actually a form of sex, the NRL needs to use a more interpretive 'reasonable person' approach and then leave the fukking rules alone. Same with things like delay tactics! Instead of tweaking how long people have to do stuff, they just need to start applying current rules that cover unsportsmanlike conduct. Refs need a license to read the flow of the game above all considerations...

[TheLoneRooster]

Yes it’s like snoring coke up your arse hole .

I have no idea what that means Thirteen, but it sounds inconvenient.

[Kentucky_Fried_Rooster]

Just give channel 9 ownership of the game as they control it anyway.
Give it 10 years and there will be a 3-minute break after every try giving more revenue to the television broadcaster.
A 630 kick-off will see the game finishing at 1030pm, will be able to reduce the interchange down to 2 players to cover injuries with more stoppage time than game time. This will allow for 4 more teams for even more games to be shown for extra revenue.

The game was so much better 25-30 years ago before the war, now it's too structured and rules being changed to suit television.

[The Skeez]

..
Thus, ...

Are you by any chance .. a lawyer?

[Mad_Rabid_Rooster]

I can understand why they are looking at it, but don't agree with it just the same. The interchange would have to be reduced if this was to be a viable option. I am a traditionalist and don't like to see fundamental structural changes made to our great game. I also don't like the idea of our rules being too out of sync with those of the international version of our code. We should distinguish ourselves from the AFL. There must be other, innovative ways to increase revenue than resorting to this, and other potential spin off effects as a result.

[The Skeez]

I have no idea what that means Thirteen, but it sounds inconvenient.

Stevie Nicks was quite the proponent of that method

[ccfc bondi]

Most of the new rules they've come up with in the last decade have been crap! Get rid of two refs, seven tackles and shot clocks. And if they REALLY want to get rid of wrestling, they need to go back to a five metre rule.

[bondi.boy]

Whatever format favours the Roosters.