Being at the same game, I agree completely. I guess it was designed to give a team a chance to pull off the high risk plays but without the risk. What it did last night was introduce two long delays whilst players trudged back to the initial knock on 70/80 yards away. OK, had both moves been finished off with tries, we might be saying what a great idea it was. But there is a reason teams don't try these type of plays in 'normal' circumstances - they tend not to work out well! I also didn't actually notice if the ref stopped the clock or not.

Could the rule not be tweaked slightly, a bit like in Union, whereby if the team given advantage kicks the ball then it's advantage over?

If they'd held onto the ball then they would have gained 80 meters and started a set close on the opposition's try-line. It's the fault of the players, not the rules.

It is the rule. if a team knocks on after running the full length, they shouldn't get the ball back 80m back up field and causing a 2 minute break while we all trudge back up field. It's 100% rule.

You can't say the pause in break is down to the players knocking on as it happens every game.

If a team runs 80m, or even makes any advantage at all, then they should prioritize ball security. The fact that the players don't yet understand the rule or haven't been properly taught what to do in those situations is nothing to do with the validity of the rule. Maybe it should be changed so that a 50 metre gain constitutes the advantage or something like that, but if a team runs 80m, continues to force passes and ends up knocking on and being brought back then it's their own fault.

It was always going to be hard for the players with the rule been introduced at such short notice but dont worry by the time the players get used to it the RFL will change it again.