Except that, refs, both here and in the NRL, hardly ever do. Considering how strict they are with so-called obstruction by dummy runners when a try is being scored, and yet defending side s seem to get way with murder.

The problem with the RFL statement is that the defenders tended not to be penalised for interference unless the ball hits them or an attacker runs into them which is why the dummy half started throwing the ball into the defender in the first place. This was generally in done in the interest of letting the game flow which is not necessarily a bad thing.

This relies on refs having the understanding of when the defender is affecting play which I'm not sure too many refs are able to do.

I dunno - I think it's pretty clear if someone is trying to impede or not - also if they are making sufficient effort to clear the ruck/not stand in passing lanes etc.

I dont think we'll see too much of it now anyway, it's not worth conceding a penalty over when you could keep the ball and attack

We also don't need defenders loitering around the ptb after a tackle, slowing it down thinking they can get away with it.

Well well well being one of the RFL's biggest critics I must take off my flat cap to them, for showing they have some balls.