One of the selling points of the NRL constantly used by those who hold it up as an example to SL is the "intensity" and the fact that "there are no easy games". Clearly not the case.

Well I'm enjoying my first taste of the NRL after several seasons away, from a skills on show and entertainment viewpoint.

I know it's a major sport in parts of Australia and they have serious money in comparison to SL and it shows - on the field, how it's officiated, how it's presented to it's audience.

Rugby League is still IMO the greatest game but it's comfortably at it's greatest in the NRL.

The simplest thing we could adopt is 7 tackles for a kick that goes dead in goal. God knows why we don't have that rule. Then start to clean up the PTB area and get them to actually play the ball with the foot, which apparently is still in the rules up here, not that you'd know it.

It assisted Leeds no end on many an October night in Manchester (and why not if the law allows) but it overly rewards an unskillfull, game slowing, containing tactic.

I don't really mind it as much as others seemingly do. Yes I know it's not an entertaining tactic for the spectator but I have no problem appreciating smart tactics and especially if it's coming from the team who is leading then they've earned the right to do that tactic. I don't expect a team in football to bomb towards goal instead of go towards the corner flag in the 90th min when they're winning 1-0 even though I'd like to see another goal.

What I can't stand like many is when we do get a good kick in-goal and the FB/winger is allowed to stick his foot behind the line and pick it up. That rule really does have to go.

Yep agree on both counts.

I'm wary of changes that further complicate an already complicated set of rules and I don't see the big deal over kicks that go dead. If the receiving team don't like it they can position a defender or 2 to stop it. I'm also wary of further forcing play down one particular route, speed. Now who isn't in favour of a quick game but I think we have to be careful we don't further sacrifice other areas of the game for making the game faster still.

As for the rule where you can take a ball dead, that's just daft and I don't know why it was brought in, especially when we have very small in-goal areas in RL anyway.

There is no better example than Fridays kick by Burrow that was absolute class and stopped inches from the dead ball line, but then saw Hull straight on the front foot due to this daft rule when they should have been on the rack. Like you say, a terrible ruling which penalises skill.

I think its a very negative tactic - is that really what we want to see in the game. Just deliberately kicking it dead isn't even particularly skillful either. In soccer they removed the ability to simply pass back to the goalie - Liverpool haven't won a championship since IIRC.

I would agree being able to put a foot over the line to make a ball dead is a terrible rule and should be removed from the game.

The other three games were relatively close or very close and there have been five golden point games already this season. In SL there has been one draw this season and we have played four rounds more. Although, like any league, there are some very good teams and some comparatively poor teams.

The NRL has and always will be the pinnacle of club RL. Look up comments made by Ellery Hanley, Adrian Morley or Gaz Ellis, they'll settle any doubts you may have.

But I think we have to allow some form of negative tactic, you could argue kicking the ball into touch is just as negative. It's just made harder because receiving teams generally drop wingers back to cover the touch lines.

Yep, I think the taking it dead rule is something where the RFL have successfully united the whole sport for once. It's a terrible rule that, to me anyway, smells of someone making up a rule without thinking about it for a few minutes.

The rule also says you can "drop" or place the ball at the PTB. [i"Regain feet (b) The tackled player shall without delay regain his feet where he was tackled, lift the ball clear of the ground, face his opponent’s goal line and drop or place the ball on the ground in front of his foremost foot. "
[/i
Yet a drop, or the slightest bobble is always deemed a knock on. The rules as written - place or drop the ball and play with the foot are fine, yet they ignore the heel and penalize a drop. Totally the wrong way around. I don't even know when they started doing this, players generally stood upright and dropped the ball when I started watching the game. It's a bad way to do it and lacks control but it was (and still is according the rules) legal.

I think a 40/20 is a real positive play - and kicking into touch especially inside the opponents 20 is a very attacking play as you are putting pressure on the skill set of the opponents inside their danger zone. That is a very different dynamic compared to a 20 metre restart.