NRL NRL Rules

[Bay39er]

Teams that score a try could be made to kick off to restart play in 2026 in one of the biggest rule changes that the NRL has contemplated recently to avoid lopsided results.

The governing body is in the process of sending out surveys to clubs and fans as part of an end-of-season review. That feedback, coupled with the NRL’s own analysis, will provide a framework for discussions that examine ways to make the game even more entertaining next year.

 

[Noitall]

Teams that score a try could be made to kick off to restart play in 2026 in one of the biggest rule changes that the NRL has contemplated recently to avoid lopsided results.

The governing body is in the process of sending out surveys to clubs and fans as part of an end-of-season review. That feedback, coupled with the NRL’s own analysis, will provide a framework for discussions that examine ways to make the game even more entertaining next year.

Don’t like that at all. Still not a fan of six agains either

 

[Cces]

Teams that score a try could be made to kick off to restart play in 2026 in one of the biggest rule changes that the NRL has contemplated recently to avoid lopsided results.

The governing body is in the process of sending out surveys to clubs and fans as part of an end-of-season review. That feedback, coupled with the NRL’s own analysis, will provide a framework for discussions that examine ways to make the game even more entertaining next year.

This rule has made 7s rugby more competitive in terms of results & if teams choose to kick short another contest for possession.

 

[Inruin]

Teams that score a try could be made to kick off to restart play in 2026 in one of the biggest rule changes that the NRL has contemplated recently to avoid lopsided results

Pretty sure we've been there and done that. And from memory made it worse. Teams were stuck in their own end after conceding a try instead of being able to do that to the opposition who just scored.

 

[Noitall]

‘Should be publicly whipped’, NRL club boss slams rule change proposal | Sporting News Australia

The NRL is considering changing the kick off rules in 2026 and one well-known rugby league official is NOT happy.

www.sportingnews.com

Hopefully Gould’s criticism is enough to deter them against scorer kicks off. Would be interesting to see what it would produce? Very much a union kick off I think to compete for the kick off, or like they do with line dropouts

 

[snake77]

Super League (Australia) had the scoring team kick off and yes it didn't work out too well. Teams that had momentum would kick off and the team that has been defending would make another mistake and then be back defending in bad field position.

Gould's argument that because they tried it years ago and it was a disaster doesn't mean it isn't worth looking at again.

Teams would talk about finishing their sets back then. There wasn't as much emphasis on the percentage they were completing at. Teams would compete at a higher rate now.

Teams also push to complete the set after scoring. The team that just scored can also fail to complete after scoring.

Also with Super League the play the balls were insanely quick. That was an area the Warriors got stuck. Recruited some big guys and the rules suited getting out of dummy half due to how the ruck was officiated. The wrestling isn't as bad as it was 10 years ago but teams do a good job of slowing the play the ball down.

The ruck speed would have flown into the kick offs as teams would have been exhausted and made mistakes.

It is worth reviewing. There also seems to be a push for more short kick-offs to create another contest for posession. Will that occur maybe. Coaches would most likely prefer to get the field position and make the opposition work the ball out of their half.

 

[Horriors2013]

Super League (Australia) had the scoring team kick off and yes it didn't work out too well. Teams that had momentum would kick off and the team that has been defending would make another mistake and then be back defending in bad field position.

Gould's argument that because they tried it years ago and it was a disaster doesn't mean it isn't worth looking at again.

Teams would talk about finishing their sets back then. There wasn't as much emphasis on the percentage they were completing at. Teams would compete at a higher rate now.

Teams also push to complete the set after scoring. The team that just scored can also fail to complete after scoring.

Also with Super League the play the balls were insanely quick. That was an area the Warriors got stuck. Recruited some big guys and the rules suited getting out of dummy half due to how the ruck was officiated. The wrestling isn't as bad as it was 10 years ago but teams do a good job of slowing the play the ball down.

The ruck speed would have flown into the kick offs as teams would have been exhausted and made mistakes.

It is worth reviewing. There also seems to be a push for more short kick-offs to create another contest for posession. Will that occur maybe. Coaches would most likely prefer to get the field position and make the opposition work the ball out of their half.

I think this has merit. It gives a team that has had to defend multiple sets of 6 a breather. They can reset themselves and if they're good enough they can even up the score straight away. Currently, if a winning team is on a roll they can just compound the pressure and keep the ball for 10-20 minutes.

However, it could be just trading one problem off for another. Instead of giving the defending team a chance to re-gain field position, you're giving them possession.

It's a fundamental debate between position and possession.

It's going to favour teams who score long range tries, who have a high completion rate. Teams that thrive on possession more than territory. It's probably a good thing. It helps prevent defensive teams winning from just playing a territory game and keeping the opposition stuck in their 20 like Storm does.

 

[Kav1]

Teams that score a try could be made to kick off to restart play in 2026 in one of the biggest rule changes that the NRL has contemplated recently to avoid lopsided results.

The governing body is in the process of sending out surveys to clubs and fans as part of an end-of-season review. That feedback, coupled with the NRL’s own analysis, will provide a framework for discussions that examine ways to make the game even more entertaining next year.

The change that the team scoring points then kicks off to the opposition was used in Super League. This prevents a team from monopolizing possession and therefore momentum.

 

[Cces]

Changing the kick off rule would be a change in tradition but Rugby & League are largely an exception to the rule when it comes to what happens after points have been scored.
Imagine Touch or Basketball if fhe scoring team retained possession?

 

[Kav1]

Pretty sure we've been there and done that. And from memory made it worse. Teams were stuck in their own end after conceding a try instead of being able to do that to the opposition who just scored.

With the change of rule, at least possession is guaranteed to change after every scoring points scoring play.

 

[Noitall]

With the change of rule, at least possession is guaranteed to change after every scoring points scoring play.

All I think would happen is kickoffs become short to create a 50/50’s with how teams back their defence

 

[Inruin]

With the change of rule, at least possession is guaranteed to change after every scoring points scoring play.

But that's all it did when implemented before. It out more pressure on the team that had conceded. And that's assuming the kicking off team doesn't try a short kick off which I don't think they would.

 

[Inruin]

All I think would happen is kickoffs become short to create a 50/50’s with how teams back their defence

I think it will be like when it was implemented previously. Kick off deep and defend with a view to getting the ball back on around your 30m mark or force a error, as opposed to receiving the ball in your 10m area if the conceding team kicks off.

 

[Kav1]

I think it will be like when it was implemented previously. Kick off deep and defend with a view to getting the ball back on around your 30m mark or force a error, as opposed to receiving the ball in your 10m area if the conceding team kicks off.

It would " kill two birds with one stone" - ie by encouraging the points scoring team to kick off short as then there is competition for the ball (and better position for the conceding team if they take possession) and a disincentive for kicking long giving the conceding team possession and the likelihood of them taking it up (thus lessening the risk of concussion). I think it is worth trialing anyway (Super League adopted it for no good reason). Gus would be against anything to do with Super League.

 

[Noitall]

I think it will be like when it was implemented previously. Kick off deep and defend with a view to getting the ball back on around your 30m mark or force an error, as opposed to receiving the ball in your 10m area if the conceding team kicks off.

If a team is willing to risk a goal line drop out short and back their defence if it doesn’t come off, I don’t see why a team wouldn’t do the same from halfway on a kick off? Would rather they were looking at a fix for things like players forced off the field for an hia when the person who causes it stays on, especially if it’s even borderline foul play than this kick off rule. I don’t see what facet they’re trying to fix with it? Results are generally overall competitive

 

[Inruin]

It would " kill two birds with one stone" - ie by encouraging the points scoring team to kick off short as then there is competition for the ball (and better position for the conceding team if they take possession) and a disincentive for kicking long giving the conceding team possession and the likelihood of them taking it up (thus lessening the risk of concussion). I think it is worth trialing anyway (Super League adopted it for no good reason). Gus would be against anything to do with Super League.

As I previously posted, the rule change has been tried and had the opposite effect of what it was intended for. Teams that have scored have very little incentive to kick off short unless trailing by a lot. They will kick off long and defend, putting the team who just conceded under pressure, often making a mistake or conceding more field position than if they kicked off.

 

[Inruin]

If a team is willing to risk a goal line drop out short and back their defence if it doesn’t come off, I don’t see why a team wouldn’t do the same from halfway on a kick off? Would rather they were looking at a fix for things like players forced off the field for an hia when the person who causes it stays on, especially if it’s even borderline foul play than this kick off rule. I don’t see what facet they’re trying to fix with it? Results are generally overall competitive

Because a line drop out is a completely different scenario.

The position put forward, I thought, was to interrupt momentum if the team who had just scored and try and even out the game more. Which I don't think is even an issue currently.

If it's to minimize collision and HIA from running it back from a kick off there are other changes that could be made that would be more effective I think

 

[Cces]

For comparison


The spooners were more competitive in Super League

 

[Inruin]

For comparison
View attachment 14966
View attachment 14967
The spooners were more competitive in Super League

You are also comparing a period with less teams than another. There is a wider share of talent now. Looks to me like the 10th best team in 1997 would be about 14th in 2025. It's a false equivalence in my opinion.

 

[Cces]

You are also comparing a period with less teams than another. There is a wider share of talent now. Looks to me like the 10th best team in 1997 would be about 14th in 2025. It's a false equivalence in my opinion.

It's not an entirely fair comparison but 30% of the teams in SL were in their very first year of existence & there was 22 professional teams in Australia that year so the talent was actually spread way wider in '97 than '25