Everyone is trying to get a quick PTB, but instead of earning it with good attacking play, a big forward hitting a great line and dominating contact, or from a clever offload, we have guys grubbing around on their knees shuffling off the mark to take the markers out of play.
One radical approach would be to make attacking more difficult. Slow down the PTB by mainly players stand up to play it (allow them to drop the ball into the foot as it actually says in the rules and we used to do), and return to the 5 metres for the defensive line. Then penalise brutally any defenders who mess about after a break or half break by the attacking side.
5 drives and a kick won't work under those circumstances and sides will actuall have to play rugby.

I like the idea of forcing the players to actually play the ball but the 5 metre defensive line will never work in the modern game. The defenders will be on top of the first receiver before they even get the ball so the only way to reliably gain metres would be five drives and a kick.

I hate to point this out but in Union the defence doesn't have to retire at all. Back feet of the ruck. Just play with more depth, offload more and be creative.

I don't watch Union so I'm not really in a position to comment. It would be interesting to see how it worked in a couple of pre-season games (didn't we try some experimental rules in the Boxing Day game against Wakefield a few years ago?) but the only result I could see would be for the all forward positions to be filled with quick second rowers with the defensive strategy to send a couple to blitz the first receiver and have the others jam into the attacking line to cut off any options.

But there are unlimited phases in union. How many phases do you see where the ball goes backwards or just stops on the gain line? Thats why a union team rarely attack from deep in their own territory, they just kick the ball away.

Not correct. Teams attack often when they have numbers from deep, even on their line. The main reason why teams kick from near their line is because the tackle is a contest, and you can lose the contest or give away a kick able penalty. It's almost as likely to give away a penalty trying to keep possession as it is when trying to win it, so you want to play the game away from your posts.

I disagree. I dont think they do attack from deep 'often' certainly not in a league sense of the word and it would certainly be rare for a union side to go length of the field in less than 6 phases.

Here we go. At least quote me correctly, " often from deep when they have numbers". See the difference?
Where did I mention going the length of the field in 6 phases?

let me lay this out for you, because your childish defensiveness has gotten you all in a tizzy.

You are proposing that Rugby League moves its defensive line from 10 metres, to 5 metres. As a point in favour of this you have pointed out that Union has 0 metres.

I am pointing out to you, that union has unlimited phases of possession, we have 6. Therefore in union you see less attacking from deep and it is rare for a union side to go the length of the field in 6 phases (which would obviously be a problem in league, with us only having 6 phases) so where in league you would see a team running out from under their own posts, you are far more likely to see a union side kick it away, because even with unlimited phases, it is difficult for a team to go the length of the field against a defensive line that is back 0 metres. To do it in 6 phases is nigh on impossible.

You couldn't have posted more inaccuracies if you were trying.

Childish defensiveness? Really? By correcting your inaccurate quote of my post?

The arguments I made regarding moving the defence back to 5 metres had nothing to do with Union. The reason I brought up Union was to answer another point regarding the lack of space that would offer the attack - specifically the first receiver getting ball and man simultaneously.

Where you got going the length in 6 phases from only you could answer as it has nothing to do with anything I was posting. You just pulled that out of your rear end, where it seems most of your rugby knowledge, union and league, seems to originate.

Yeah, i think childish defensiveness is pretty accurate,

Where i got going the length in 6 phases from was... well its kind of the aim of our game. For our game to work, it kinda has to be a fairly common occurrence.

You are saying that union get around the lack of space offered in attack, im pointing out to you that they do it less, and with unlimited phases.

I would say League teams going the length of the field in 6 tackles is a bit rarer than you might think. Excluding penalties or line breaks I would say most sets that start deep in your own territory often get just about over half way.

For what it's worth I don't think changing the offside rule would help, as has been said elsewhere, the ruck is the problem on both sides of the ball, and it is attempts to get around it by changing other areas that has lead to the mess it is in now.

One example of this is actually a shorter 10. Referees, often when they say a player with the ball is diving forward will not move them back to the mark, but not take the defending team back any further with the inference being that the short 10 against you is the punishment for moving off the mark. One of my pet hates at the moment.

There you go again showing total rugby ignorance. There is pretty much nothing correct in that post. Calling you out for being clueless is not defensive, only your ego sees it that way.

There are 5 definitive statements in that post.

That going the length of the field within 6 phases or tackles is the point of our game.

that for our game to work that needs to happen relatively often.

that you have said union get around the lack of space.

that Union go the length of the field less often

and that union have unlimited phases.

Perhaps you would like to elucidate us all to which of those are wrong and why? Or you could carry on with your childish defensiveness and hiding behind unimaginative ad hominems.

Hes right about moving off the mark. It drives me nuts. Its a clear tactic from some teams, stride forward and to the left or right 1 or 2 meters pushing past defender who are trying to line up against the mark. Refs virtually never penalise it yet will quiet often pull the defenders for 'not being square' when they are and its the attacker who has moved. it frustrates players and fans alike but some have it coached into them