Funny but I don't seem to recall you being so pious with your beloved NRL Do you honestly think that all those trips by Australian coaches to work with NFL sides in the late seventies only brought back advanced training techniques?

Only last year, there was a scandal surrounding pretty much the same thing - the excessive and uncontrolled or unnecessary use of prescription drugs - at Souths. Did you have anything to say on that particular matter?

I don't mind you getting on your soap box my good man but please, keep some consistency in your targeting.

I was there also & despite the pleading of my (then) young son I insisted that we stayed to watch history being made.
I feel it made him a better person.
Re the PTB, the refs should apply the rules (laws?) of the game & make the attacking player play the ball with his foot.
They should also penalise any player moving off the mark &/or not regaining his feet.
We may suffer a plethora of penalties but eventually you'd hope that players would get the message.

You'd hope so but it often seems that they make marginal improvements to their discipline that lasts as long as it takes for refs to wind down their latest crackdown. Would a glut of penalties really improve the spectacle? To be honest, I'd rather a review panel watched a video and fined the worst offending sides. Any player committing an offence that crosses into the realm of a professional foul cops a one game ban.

The NRL made a point of having the ball played correctly with the foot at the start of this season. It only took a couple of penalties for the message to sink in and by and large it lasted the season.

All that is lacking in SL is the will to do it.

It could be they think the spectacle of the game is improved by quick, sloppy play the balls, I just think it looks untidy, gives an unfair advantage to the attacking team and represents another lost skill.

In fairness, bringing back a "proper" PTB would seem the easier task when compared to bringing order to the wrestling, flopping, holding down, milking of penalties, attempted dislodging of the ball and moving off the mark that constitutes a typical ruck. None the less, it would be a start.

I know what you mean but I think we can possibly do things that encourages defences to not wrestle as much. For instance the held call. Right now there is no incentive for a defence to hold a player up. There is incentive to hold him up for as long as possible and then get him to the ground. This is at least partly because if they do hold the ball carrier long enough for the ref to shout held then the defences get penalised with a very quick play the ball. If we controlled the held call and made it slower so that defences/markers weren't caught out by it then it may tempt defences to be not as keen on getting the ball carrier down.

I think we're all pretty much agreed on a 2nd ref which would help give instructions to the players and get defenders off quicker.

To help the attack I'd also move the point at which defences are allowed to move up. Right now it's at the point at which the ball carrier's foot touches the ball when he plays it (although in reality it's as he bends down to play it, defences are allowed up too quickly). I'd move it to when the acting half touches the ball. It should give attacks an extra bit of time and space.