I don't agree, it seems entirely logical. If a player can gather the ball and get to the 20m line before the opposition is set, he's won the right to a quick tap.

Having someone like a ballboy or spectator fling the ball to someone ready to tap essentially gives the team an additional player. It also clearly unfairly benefits a home side over the away side.

Now as for whether a player who has gathered the ball can pass it to someone else on their own team to take a quick tap, I'm indifferent as to whether they should be allowed or not. Currently they're not, and I don't really see any reason to change it.

Yeah and some referees seem to allow "quick taps" whereas some don't. A bit of consistency wouldn't go amiss.

Surely a quick tap after a penalty should always be allowed as it's really just another form of "playing advantage". If the opposition then tackles from an offside position, then that should be another penalty. Not even sure why the "tapping team" would all need to be onside prior to the tap as long as they were not involved in, or interfering with, the play.

It's not playing advantage, it's penalising the defence twice. When a penalty is given the defence is immediately offside, they should be given chance to retire the 10m required to put them onside again.
I wouldn't object to quick taps from penalties if the team taking the tap had to take the defence as it is when they take the tap. Ie if a defender is only 5m back instead of the required 10 when the tap is taken then he wouldn't be penalised for being offside.

But I don't like the "Union style" quick tap rule because defenders can't just magically and immediately retire 10m.

The attacking players need to be onside because it's consistent with every other controlled restart of play we have in RL, not that it'd matter much because there are very few incidents where attackers would be ahead of the point of a penalty anyway.

The whole rule needs looking at again. Especially as the NRL play a different rule to super league & internationals are different again. For me it is a good skill to have but as I have advocated on other threads it should be a proper tap, place the ball on the floor play it forward with the foot then pick it up, not wave it in the general direction of your boot while running at full speed. That is how the tap was in both codes in the 1960's it rewarded attack if done properly but also it was a risk as there was always the risk of a knock on especially on a wet & muddy pitch. A player had to take that into account when choosing the quick option.

Er, because that is what the rules say?

the player isnt in control of what the crowd do, nor the ball boys. Whats to stop the home team putting loads of ball boys behind the goal line and telling them to get to the ball ASAP to stop the away team ever getting a quick tap.

The obvious rule should be to just have balls available around the ground with players able to pick one up and get the quick tap.

I disagree. The match ball is the match ball. I know that they now have several available, and I have no problem with that at all, but the same rules have to apply to both teams for fairness. If it was allowed for the home team to set up ball retrievers for the purpose of devising quick taps then that is unfair. If another ball comes to hand quicker than the player who ultimately takes the tap could have got it himself, then again I have no problem to it being used but not if the defending team is disadvantaged, as the time saved is artificial, it would not have happened had the match ball in play been used.

The reason it is unequal is simply because (obviously) the home ballboys would never do the same for the away side. And the away side are not allowed to bring a host of ballboys themselves. Although the idea of competing squads of ballboys trying to effect or prevent quick taps does have an amusing air of farce about it!

its a possibility though.

Also the ball going in to the crowd etc and being held etc

Just have 5 or so balls behind the goal line, pick one up and go for it

If the ball goes into the crowd, there's no chance of a quick tap anyway, so it doesn't matter if the crowd hold onto it or not.

I guess this is a difference in preference, I'd prefer a player to win the right to a quick tap play, you would prefer the game to restart as quickly as possible. I think both are fair enough suggestions.

I'm not sure how this differs to Australia though?