Same in the NRL, isn't it? Players aren't penalised for not touching the ball with their foot there, as long as there's a reasonable attempt.

Always makes me laugh there, though, the way they are insistent on a correct p-t-b after a stoppage, after an injury say, shouting "make sure you use your foot!", like it matters on that occasion, but on others, not so much.

The walking off the mark into defenders happens just as much in the NRL, I reckon. Indeed, the players are often praised for it, "making metres after contact". The two, however are not the same thing.

I'm really not bothered at all about the foot at the play the ball, as long as the player lifts his leg over the ball and doesn't just roll it between his legs then that's fine with me.

As for having no problems with the play the ball for 100 years, is that a joke? It used to be a complete and utter mess.

There's a general theme in all this, though, isn't there? Seems to me that, presumably in the interests of promoting 'attacking rugby', the advantage has increasingly been granted to the side in possession. Hence:

a) players not penalised for walking off the mark, indeed, the defending side usually get done for 'crowding'.

b) excessive use of strip rulings: ball-carriers should take greater responsibility for ball security, as they used to. Defenders should only be penalised for a strip when the ball is literally ripped out, a mere hand on the ball is not enough.

c) players attempting to play the ball before they've got to their feet: once again, the defending side is usually penalised.

Speaking of players moving off the mark, a Wigan forward (shock) when on saints line should have been penalised. i can't recall who it was though.

It was Taulima Tautai; he walked forward several metres before 'playing' the ball, but was not penalised.

And I'll bet that if a saints player had tried to stop him doing that he would have been penalised !.

Think he did it it quite a few times, one occasion he almost played the ball over the saints try line. A lot of the time the refs are not looking at it because they are setting the "10 metre" defensive line, then they see 2 players tangled up at the PTB so the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker, similar thing happens on a loose carry ref assumes interference. Probably need 2 refs to clean up the PTB process.

Or have the touchjudge keeping an eye out at the PTB?

Or have the TJ actually do there job and police offside at the PTB by watching down the line. The ref can then watch the PTB

What is the point of Touch Judges in today's game other than to put their flag up when in touch? (They still get that wrong as well some of the time)

Bingo - another example where using the rules and resources that are already available are a much more sensible solution than cooking up something new.

I think it's one of those where if the player stumbles forward (whether deliberate or loss of balance) it will generally be let go particularly if the defender still has his hands on the attacker. It's harsh to give a penalty against the attacker unless the ref is 100% sure the defender's hands hasn't caused the stumble forward.

Hicks invented a new rule last night.... Ball hits players knees now = knock on!!!!!!

TJ's fault not Hicks.

My pet hate is players moving 2 metres to the side of where the tackle took place and thus milking a penalty for the markers not being square.

Yep. Hicks will have had players blocking his view. He'll have seen a player (Gidley?) bending as if he's attempting to catch the ball and then the ball hit the floor as if it's been knocked on.
In the absence of any other info I can't blame Hicks for giving it as a knock on.

I can only assume the TJ was unsighted too otherwise I can't for the life of me think why he didn't tell Hicks what actually happened.

The game is very fast and refs have a huge amount of decisions to make in every set of 6 let alone the whole game. We need to use the TJ's more/better and I also think we need a "2nd ref" although I don't think we need to do it in the same way as the NRL do, rather than a 2nd ref I think we need a "3rd" TJ but one who is on the pitch and can monitor the play the ball and report to the ref.