Football has to put up with draws because the nature of it makes it a regular occurrence. Our scoring system means they are rare and they cannot be played for. They don't need to be part of our game.

Of course I understand the requirement for a result is not the same for a league match as in a cup competition. But that doesn't preclude a result on the day being a desirable result. In the end, I don't think the joy the team that scores last to gain the draw equals the disappointment their opponents feel, in the same way it does in a win-lose situation. To help maximise audience satisfaction, the draw should be eliminated.

It's common to bash Aus/US innovations, but we all know they tend to be successful and we tend to take them on. NRL tries to minimise draws, as I understand it most US sports have overtime. We could benefit from thinking along the same lines.

Nothing wrong with a draw which is I believe a fairer result that having a winner by golden point

To suggest that something has a solution implies that there is a problem in the first place – the vast majority of people on these boards agree that draws are a fair result in the majority of situations and, by very definition of being close contests, are usually good games

The away goal in football is not a good analogy – these were introduced to stop away teams playing for the draw and penalties (and hence very boring games). I cannot recall seeing a Rugby League team playing for a draw with a defensive based game

Draws are usually good, for 79 minutes and 59 seconds. But it's not just me who thinks there's a problem with them. If only I'd been born one hundred and ten years earlier, I would have suggested this at the George and you'd all be poo-pooing anyone who suggested getting rid of it. Born in the wrong century and the wrong country by the looks of it, the Seppos have the right idea - a tie is like kissing your sister ( I don't have a sister, I'll have to take their word for it). en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tie_(draw) I don't doubt RL can survive keeping the draw. I think it could have survived not bring in the 40:20. But that's not a reason not to bring either of those rule changes in.

Draws are usually good, for 79 minutes and 59 seconds. But it's not just me who thinks there's a problem with them. If only I'd been born one hundred and ten years earlier, I would have suggested this at the George and you'd all be poo-pooing anyone who suggested getting rid of it. Born in the wrong century and the wrong country by the looks of it, the Seppos have the right idea - a tie is like kissing your sister ( I don't have a sister, I'll have to take their word for it). en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tie_(draw) I don't doubt RL can survive keeping the draw. I think it could have survived not bring in the 40:20. But that's not a reason not to bring either of those rule changes in.

Golden point is the way forward.

Imagine our game against Saints at Cardiff or our game agains Leeds away going live on sky sports into extra time golden point. It would be a great advert for the game, people would hear about it on SSN and turn over.

" and after four tackles, you just... hand it over? You've not dropped it, you've not kicked it away, you have to give it to the opposition? Are you on crack?"

Stupid idea. What's wring with each team gaining a point? It also makes the league more exciting with draws gang teams a point.

No it isn't , if you want a drop goal fest , watch RU , league games don't need a definite result , cup games do

Have some sympathy but disagree having seen it in practice in the NRL. Fetishises the DG and is knackering for the players. Keep the game to 80 mins where at all possible.

Again - it's a non-result. Neither side is satisfied, each has to wait till the end of the season to know if it was a point gained or lost. We can one-up football here by having every game settled on the day without the need for extra time or shoot-outs.

I like draws

Agree 100%.