QLD officials will rush to bring in Fwit Dessy to oversee Paul Green

Are Idiot Elliott & Waddell Queenslanders by any chance?

If they are they are playing game 3.

It's the no scrums and ability to slow the tempo of the game that I'm talking about.

Basically the faster team wins. The grind is gone. 

6 agains are also a problem. They should go back to last years 6 agains limiting them to only 1 or 2 indiscretions.

Not normally a fan of one sided affairs, but both games of origin have been fantastic to watch....

Never thought I’d ever see the QLD SOO team try to replicate the Bulldogs in attack for 80mins

Unbelievable... Can’t believe they’re overlooking you again... 

You keep standing out front of QRL headquarters with that cardboard sign and I’ll keep honking as I drive past....

To what extremes do they go in the bunker to try and find a try for Queensland...if Gagai's elbow hadn't been so obviously on the dead ball line it was going to be a try despite 3 earlier infractions. 

They call me the King up there

The faster, fitter, smarter, more skillful team wins.

The up tempo game doesn't give the weaker team a chance.

Scorers should kick off, may a few other minor tweaks, but I don't blame the rules for bad play.
Rules are the same for both teamns...

All of NSW is voting for you for QLD coach.

Disgraceful.
It looked like they gave up on the gameplan after the first try from JAC. 
They only improved when Ben Hunt decided the other 2 misfits were just taking up space, and decided to play halfback, 5/8th and hooker himself...

That's cause a second thrashing would be costly for the game and the SOO concept....
Dont you know this by now?

It’s sad watching how good some of those players were tonight when you remember that we almost signed Teddy, Turbo and Trell. 

The game doesn't need any more tweaks,  it actually needs to be wound back and even reset. Fvck off the 6 agains, bring back the scrum, I mean the REAL scrum, not the roll the ball through the locks legs scrum. If they did that then we would return to the good hard exciting games where a lot of the time the next try could win the game and you would get a lot more intense attack and a hell of a lot more scrambling tryline defence. Maybe V'landys doesn't want that, maybe it upsets his gambling syndicate mates. Who knows.

Don’t bring “real scrums” back, if you do you have to bring back real inane scrum penalty’s.

watching games from the “real scrum” days the scrums just look like some sort of slow uncoordinated beast with 24 legs that kicks itself until it falls over.

How is Latrell & Cherry-Evans going toe to toe not headlining???

shows the ethical problem in the queenslanders not backing up their captain 

Where's Papalii's head at on #Origin week declaring his allegiance to Tonga..

DCE is the pup Clarke of league.

While posters here don't like Luai, it is odvious he brings a lot of energy a lot of footy and boosts team unity.

Queenslanders are naturally inclined to be unified and energetic.
But to defend against Teddy, Turbo and Latrell you need to be fit and mobile, very fit. 
Compare Teddy to Val Homes, one touched the ball a lot and moved Queenland forwards around a lot.

Special mention to the Fox, I can't wait to have him aboard...

Let's face the truth, in the good old days, players were smaller, slower, less skillful, the game was slower but players were better defenders.

One part is defending a slow game, with slow play the balls, a 5 metre rule, slow passing and mostly slow moving forwards.

When the backs made a break the fowards didn't have the pace to scramble, stopping the try meant making the cover defending tackle.

Scrums were a lottery with multiple penalties against both sides possible each scrum.

Towards the end of the the 5 metre rule defence was to good for the attack, games were neither side scored a try would have become the norm.

I agree.
As much as the later day scrums were a no contest, they did serve a purpose on the clock,  allowed players and refs a much needed rest, gave opportunity to attack only 6 players in the defence and made the game "look" appealing to non rugby league fans.

Time to bring them back

You are correct.

But these new rules only favour teams who already had fast, mobile, fit and footy smart players. The teams that dont (like us, broncos, raiders, tigers etc) will struggle to populate our teams with the required type for at least another 3-5 years...

And not only that.... the game has become less of a contest and many viewers switch off at half time. 

But fear not. The broadcasters who run the game will have ultimate say and as soon as a ratings review takes place at seasons end, we will revert back to last years rules...

The balls are also significantly better.

If they persist with the rules it will take 3 more seasons for defence to close the gap on attack.

With fulltime coaching problems can be fixed, most ex-players understand the issue, that is why clubs are bidding high for Dale Finucane.

We have Jackson and we have Topine we don't need Finucane, our problems are elsewhere.

The good teams scramble well in defence and work together, the good teams are organised in attack and in position early. Part of it is fitness and desire. The rest is coaching, building trust, confidence and combinations.

The wrestle and gang tackling has also meant players haven't practiced good tackle technique for one on one tackling. One off-season will help, but up to 5 years to fix this properly.

Many squads have too many forwards who lack fitness, workrate and mobility.
1-2 seasons to fix that.

I don't think they will change the rules without seeing how clubs respond after an offseason and improving their roster.

The rules are only hilighting how poor some of the weaker teams are, and a lot of that is lack of desire. The weak links are being exposed, NRL is about meeting the standard, not dragging the standard down to the level where lazy unfocused players can complete.

One reason the old fashioned scrums had to be taken out was the serious risk of injury. The athletes are bigger & stronger now too, so with all the possibilities of the scrums twisting & turning & collapsing it is very dangerous with players having their arms literally caught up in the fray with a ton of bricks landing on them in awkward positions etc.

I still think things like kicks for touch should be some kind of modern version of the scrum because that moments breather is very important for the players. With all the unstoppable momentum the new rules are creating, players are being left with no control of their arms at times from so much continuous defense & need a moment to "shake it out" so to speak. 

To use a daft example, if you had to carry 2 slabs of beer from your car to your house, it wouldn't be difficult to manage. But if you had to carry them from Circular Quay all the way to Katoomba without a break, it would be almost impossible. Maybe you'd make it as far as Martin Place before having to put them down. Maybe if you endured the pain as the arms started straining you could get a lot further, but chances are you'd reach the point where the control of the arms would end & you'd unwillingly drop the lot somewhere along the way. Some would get closer than others, but apart from dman who could balance at least 4 or 5 slabs on his head & do Egyptian dancing the whole way without a break, the point is arms reach a point where there's a loss of control & need a break for a minute or 2. That's why I'm not really a fan of the combination of new rules. I wouldn't be disappointed if they get rid of them or at least adjust them within more realistic levels so there isn't so much unstoppable momentum causing blow out scorelines.

An example of a match with contrasting halves of football is the recent Parra v C'bury. First half was balanced, nothing between the sides, score close at half time. 2nd half the unstoppable momentum hit with all the 6 agains etc resulting in the 2nd half being a blow out scoreline which didn't really represent how close the match should've been. I still think Parra would've won it, but not that way or by that much.

Consistency is important with 6 agains.

But still for 80-90% of tries scored this season at least one defender makes a mistake, and poor reads and players making different decisions are more common than a simple miss.

Kicks for touch should result in a scrum.
Forward passes and simple lost balls a handover, but with time to set the defensive line.

That way when a team needs a rest they can kick for touch and maybe they should get a bit more time on the scrum clock. 40/20s option of a tap or a scrum.

The ways scrums are done these days, the risk of injury is minor

Players like Finucane bring more to the team than just their on field ability though. He is a thorough professional. Knows what it takes to win. Will set a standard at the club and add to the team leadership and culture alongside blokes like Jackson and Thompson. Once you have that only then can you bring in young talented guys and expect to get the best out of them. Without that, you end up like the Tigers.

All a pipedream. We couldn't even afford what we got under the administration at the time

I'm not so concerned about the winning if the ball at the scrums but we need to get back to the point where the forwards have to push in the scrums. Keep forwards out of the backline and allow more attacking movements. Be able to dominate the opposition pack and keep them out of the play.
I agree get rid of the six again. If a penalty warranted call advantage, play out the six and then award the penalty. 

There were different body shapes because of the scrum

What it boils down to is the NRL made too many changes too quickly and its affecting the product.

Why dont they "massage-in" the rules over a period of say 3 or 5 years to allow teams to adjust without ruining the game?

Teams and some players will adjust over time or end their careers - I agree. But in the meantime, the game loses its market share and appeal.