Suck it up Bombers

[ScottH]

Rushed-behind rule must change: Leigh Matthews

If you think about it, Joel Bowden's a genius

From the team that made "red time" time wasting an art form, I say what goes around ...

[Mike_B]

Simple solution was raised on SEN yesterday - clock doesn't start again til the ball leaves the goalsquare.

[goswannie14]

Simple solution was raised on SEN yesterday - clock doesn't start again til the ball leaves the goalsquare.

I think that should also apply for all stoppages in play. The clock doesn't start until the ball is touched in play from free kicks, ball ups, and boundary throw ins. However that may mean that the official length of a quarter is reduced to 15 minutes plus time on so that the game doesn't become any longer than it already is.

[Mike_B]

Or just go with Leigh Matthews' solution - play is restarted after a rushed behind with a ball up at the top of the goalsquare.

[ScottH]

Or just go with Leigh Matthews' solution - play is restarted after a rushed behind with a ball up at the top of the goalsquare.

No, don't like that idea.

BT said that if the bombers were smart enough they would've rushed at him, given away a free kick, and he would have been forced to kick over the man on the mark.

[CureTheSane]

If I was playing with the Bombers (and I could have if I wanted to) I would have given away a 50

Edit: Scott posted one minute before me - I didn't copy his post, it was a coincidence.
Just so you know

[floppinab]

No, don't like that idea.

BT said that if the bombers were smart enough they would've rushed at him, given away a free kick, and he would have been forced to kick over the man on the mark.

Read somewhere Roosey suggested something similar. Just rush him, that should trigger a 50m penalty (not a free kick). You'd still need to stick someone on the offensive side of him (outside the 5m limit of course) once he's move up 50m, to stop him simply turning around and thumping it through for another point once he's called play on, but that should do it.

EDIT : double whoops CTS beat me!!!!!!

[ugg]

Something that has been overlooked was that after the 2nd time, Bowden did actually kick out to McMahon. So perhaps concede the short kick to the back pocket, and then it would be harder for them to rush another behind from there.

[Industrial Fan]

I think they should just rush him to concede a 50m penalty.

[NMWBloods]

I quite like Gerard Healy's solution. After an intentionally rushed behind the ball is bounced 25m out from goal.

[CureTheSane]

I quite like Gerard Healy's solution. After an intentionally rushed behind the ball is bounced 25m out from goal.

Haven't heard that one yet.
But I'd say on the 50m line is probably more realistic.

[swantastic]

Simple solution was raised on SEN yesterday - clock doesn't start again til the ball leaves the goalsquare.

That's a silly possible rule change Mike,the person at fault isnt Bowden its the opposition players who are at fault for not picking up their respective players.

[NMWBloods]

A refinement may be that the player taking the kickout cannot put the ball over the line for a behind without someone else out touching it (like kicking it OOB). That way they don't have to adapt it to all rushed behind circumstances (which will be difficult as seen in the pre-season matches).

[swantastic]

I quite like Gerard Healy's solution. After an intentionally rushed behind the ball is bounced 25m out from goal.

I like Healy but that is one of the stupidest things i have ever heard in my life.

That's about as dumb as asking if an e-mail needs a stamp.

[swantastic]

A refinement may be that the player taking the kickout cannot put the ball over the line for a behind without someone else out touching it (like kicking it OOB). That way they don't have to adapt it to all rushed behind circumstances (which will be difficult as seen in the pre-season matches).

Why refine any thing FFS just leave it how it is,we all whinge about new rule changers and if they change this all it will do is give us more to whinge about.