If the goal “square” becomes a rectangle, marks taken inside the lines pointing towards the centre are on a much better angle than marks taken inside the old 7m square (is it a square or is it 7m x 10m?), so it won’t make much difference.
What about if the goal square was simply the Toyota logo, with the smaller oval being the existing goal square and the larger oval being the larger goal square?
When players kick out from the small oval the commentators would have to say “oh what a feeling!”, whereas when they kicked from the larger circle it would be mandatory for the commentator to plug the end of financial year deals on ex-demo model Camrys
So many people seem to be geometrically-challenged on this one. It makes very little difference when you mark 10 metres out, let alone 17.
Don’t have much of an issue with this one.
The other suggestion is irrelevant most of the time (how often do teams start with >8 defenders?) but is very likely just there to make the slippery slope onwards to more horrid rules less of a PR challenge.
The starting possie rules will make the final few minutes of a tight game interesting, you’d have a maximum of 8 players in or near the backline at a centre bounce then a wave of players rushing back after the bounce
I’ve said it before, . but the lengthening of the square is unnecessary. All they need to do is put a spot on the field, whatever distance out from goal they want, for the opposition to stand the mark, … as if a mark had just been taken by the defender, 18 metres(?)out directly in front of goal. Simple.
So that is a good thing, right? It means the F50 pressure thing is relieved with a decent hoof to somewhere near the centre. How many of our disasters were caused by not being able to clear out of the D50, we not allowed that pressure, we invited it with all those dinky little passes to the back pocket. Way too predictable.