Reducing points for tries from kicks makes me believe that you have never played the game. The incredible skill it takes to kick a ball accurately under pressure of goal line defence is worthy of the 4 points, never mind some of the incredible finishes seen over the years by top class wingers. Catching a ball at full stretch, in the air battling with 90-100 kilo wingers is a tough ask, and the likes of Hall, Richards and Monaghan have had some great contests which add to the spectacle.

I think the 4 points are more than justified.

1. Increase the points scored for a try to 11
2. 8 interchanges but props cannot be subbed
3. Increase the length of the game to 90 minutes
4. Have a house music piano interlude instead of the hooter

No, no, no no and no.

Need to alter the ball stripping rule and put more emphasis on the ball carrier looking after the ball.
These days the "clever" ball carrier is releasing the ball when there is any kind of contact with the ball or forearm.
Perhaps it should be a knock on (or play on), unless there is foul play in the tackle ?

Joel's try in the grand final, one handed tip over Richards, re-gathered and grounded.........a lot more skill needed than a prop crashing through a tackle by a scrum half 1 meter from the line.........

I agree. It's a very grey area. My biggest concern is all this foul play in the tackle from defenders. The ball often comes out with quite some force and a knock on is given when clearly it's been stripped out. It's so difficult to enforce rules when there are 3 or 4 in the tackle all with their hands on the ball trying to prevent the offload. There was a cover photo on one of this years issues of League Express that illustrated it perfectly. My Dad said of it at the time ''what chance have you got if the ball becomes loose in tackles like that?''.

Ba-dum-bum-tish!

And I didn't think the OP could be topped.

Well seeing as we are havingg the new league structure. Can we change it back.

Well ok he's my thoughts on what I'd change

1.Bring back the shoulder charge.

2. Right a big one that means The NRL AND SL coming together and drawing up one set of common rules, discipline and marketing ideas.

3. With the introduction of the new league system, after the first round of games we then go into a month of international games, this to help the games appeal and also giving the teams time to sort out season tickets, and marketing for the second half of the season.
This mid season month consists of ENGLAND, IRELAND, SCOTLAND, WALES, FRANCE AND ITALY playing a 6 nations.
This is also where point 2 comes into play, the NRL shuts down for a month to play SOO, European based players are released to play 6N
The KIWIS, SAMOA, FIJI, TONGA, PNG AND COOK ISLANDS play 6 nations too and any remaing nations can set up a 6 way tournament USA, RUSSIA etc.

I'd have an end of season Europe, Polynesian and Oz tournament, with both 6N used as the selection process for Europe and Poly Isles with SOO the selection for Oz team.

Possibly add a 4th team REST OF THE WORLD, to help development and appeal.

All good suggestions. I would go for:

1. Away shirts should be outlawed. In the event of a colour clash, the team with the most attractive players (as determined by Nigel Wood) should be ordered to play topless under standard shirts vs skins rules.
2. Alter the referee's head cam so that it can deliver a short blast of intense light into the face of any penalised player that is complaining to the referee, hence blinding them temporarily. Then immediately restart the game with the heaviest member of the attacking team running directly at the blinded defender, whose teammates aren't allow to tackle the attacker.
3. Once the defensive line is broken, allow any person wearing the defending teams official replica jersey to enter the field of play to stop the attacking side.
4. Shoulder charges should be penalised.

Agree with everything there apart from number 4. that's just ridiculous in my opinion

A serious one, no ' secondary tackling ' if more than 1 tackler is involved

Ie, once you have effected a tackle ie say around the midrift of a player , once you release that grip, you are not allowed to touch the player again, no secondary grabbing, no grabbing of boot, not even pushing as in touching the player as he regains his feet and plays the ball, instant penalty, I know this would instantly retire Danny Buderus but it would it would speed up the game

How about turning the home kit inside out, that what we had to do as kids.

Quarters. Extra ad break for the tv companies, breaks up the game at a time when a team can run away with it which would keep the game closer

Gets my vote

I was being serious too

A little historical aside...

originally in rugby, you didn't get points for a try at all...it was indeed a 'try' - that is, your reward for grounding the ball over the line was to have a free attempt at kicking a goal - the only way you got points.

On a slightly serious note why do people want to speed up the game any more? Half the problems come with players trying to slow it down as the 10 meter rule makes it very dificult to get on side. The only thing that will happen if we take kicking out of the game is to turn all players into the same size & shape. We also have a problem that the game is becoming too predicable 6 plays & kick with little variation in play it is starting to get one dimentional.
I would make it the duty of a player in attack or defence to keep the ball in play so diving to the ground that is coached nowadays (winning the floor) should be rightly punished as a voulantry tackle as it is just as bad as hand on the ball in the ruck.

1 and 2 I agree with fully.

3 is a complete non-starter. What do the non-international/SoO SL and NRL players do during this shutdown month? Who would want a break from watching SL and NRL to then watching the Kiwis and England coast through their respective competitions against mostly part-time players. Mid-season RL international tournaments are a long, long way off. Ireland, Scotland and Italy don't even have a semi-pro club team, cobbling together a group of players because of dodgy eligibility rules would not have the appeal that you suggest it would.

The emerging nations, and more specifically the grassroots and club game in the emerging nations needs years of development before any sort of mid-season international tournament on either side of the globe would have any sort of appeal. It simply does not work when one side is far superior to the others and the outcome is a forgone conclusion before it's even started.

The players not playing get a months rest, helps teams plan operations or rest injuries.

Yes England and New Zealand would walk it the first few times BUT what it does is gives regular games and probablya better sense of belonging to these players, we build better fan bases and prevent the stocking up of players for England and NZ, players want to play for Eng and NZ because they're always involved in the big games, if we give them regular games against the bigger teams players are more likely to choose Wales and Ireland, I would go sone way to stopping country hopping.

The WC shows iy has legs, triple head the games this side. Possibly play all the games in NZ on the other side, England and NZ have a responsibility to drag these teams up.

So the players who aren't involved go cold for a month, and then are expected to come back and play in the business end of the season, sure the clubs will love that.

I agree that it is the responsibilty of the established countries to help the development of the emerging ones, but it's not going to happen just by playing our first choice team against there's more regularly and putting 80 on them. And it wouldn't just be the first few times, until there is a larger pool of players to choose from in these emerging nations it would be the same story for 10 years+.

The World Cup showed that there's an appetite to watch international RL between the developing nations, IN A WORLD CUP. Look at the scores and attendances of last year's European Autumn International series, these are the sorts of figures we could expect in a mid-season tournament. The major draw to watching some of the developing nations in the WC was to watch the NRL players that Fiji, Samoa etc had playing for them, not to see which Whitehaven player is playing for Scotland because his grandad saw someone play the bagpipes once.

Who are these players who aren't choosing to play for Wales or Ireland because they're not playing enough games against the big sides?

The next step of international RL development needs to be at grassroots level, increasing the numbers of genuine Irish, Welsh, Italian and Scottish people playing the game, forming club sides and amateur leagues, with the hope of getting some playing at a semi-pro level and then towards SL. All this is years away but IMO would have to happen before a meaningful European international tournament could be mooted. The French are leading the way in terms of European development, with their own domestic league and a team in SL, but it's been shown time and time again that they don't have the player pool to compete at the top level with Aus, NZ and England.

If the ball is kicked dead, the defending team should get a penalty from where the ball was kicked. Kicking the ball dead is now being used as a tactic so that you can set up your defensive line on the 20 and have a breather.

Nope. All it would do is penalise attempted good kicks that stray too long. It would encourage kickers to kick for safety or the sidelines instead of attempting to get the ball in-goal.

If the defending team don't want that 20m upfield then they can defend the kick quite easily.