Rules are rules. Laws are open to interpretation.

Nothing wrong with how it is now. The rules/laws of the game state that a player can pick the ball up so that rules out any "technically this technically that crap". If the ball is touched onto the ground then it's a drop out whether it's accidental or not. You can't get more black and white than that.

The ball has to be rounded with downward pressure for a drop out no? So picking it up is different as there is no downward pressure, well there might be a slight bit of downward pressure as the player first touches the ball but if it's part of picking the ball up it's play on. If a player slips and grounds the ball then unlucky, but they shouldn't have slipped! It's up to the defender to make sure they don't ground the ball in goal to avoid a drop out.

Yep. It's as if the english language is supposed to be suspended because, well, pedantry.

No. Rules are a concept, rugby league has them by their very definition.

Its a bad rule that should not exist.

Never existed in my playing days, nor should exist now.

You either place the ball dead, or get up and attempt to clear your lines.

I hate to say this, but doing this gives no prowess to the attacking side. Should be a 10m scrum IMHO, similar to RU.

Completely agree! I don't like the 20m restart rule when you jump and catch it either. If the attacking team can place a kick in the in goal area they should be rewarded accordingly. It should be either a drop out if caught in goal or the ball goes in to touch, or it's brought back in to the field of play and play on.

An attacking team are perfectly entitled to contest such a ball, it's just that more often than not there is no one near the man who diffuses the bomb.

Then he can run in field. If it is being contested, the attacking team lose out because they can't tackle him and what should be an advantageous position dissipates.

Not logical.

The kick only creates a POTENTIALLY advantageous position.

If the attacking team follows it up and contests for the ball, and if the attackers are better than the defenders, then they get the ball, and score a try.

If the Kick is not well enough placed to allow the attackers to contest it, or if they do contest it but the defender wins the contest and catches the ball, then they get the ball and get a tap on the 20.

You are talking as if a kick into the in-goal is currently a clever and wonderful piece of skill, which should be rewarded. In fact, it isn't. It is either a POOR kick, or at best, a high-risk strategy. A GOOD kick is one that falls just SHORT of the in-goal, because that gives the attackers more options and will never lead to giving the defence a 20 metre tap.

Anyone who kicks a ball that will land in-goal, either didn't mean to (in which case it was a misdirected kick and not deserving of a reward) or knowingly took the risk that by doing so, a de-fuse would surrender possession to a 20m restart.

It wouldn't be a poor kick if it was meant to trap the defence in goal rather than try and score forcing a repeat set. A kick meant to land in a specific band of the field which forces a catch is not poor either. The defence should concentrate on putting the kicker off to avoid such a well placed kick.

It would be an exceptionally poor kick, because if done on purpose, the kicker would have to be an idiot who didn't know the rule that if it was caught in goal, he wouldn't be "trapping" the defence in goal, he would be giving them a 20m tap.

Currently, yes. What I am saying is that such an accurate kick and chase should be rewarded.

Any half decent kicker could kick the ball to land in goal, especially when only less than 20m out. Defenders will never get the ball back until attackers make a mistake. Stupid idea.

There are other rules out there which are much worse that need sorting.
For example, "dragging" people into touch. If they're not held (ball carrying arm hitting the floor or momentum stopped) this should be allowed to reward good defence.
Voluntary tackle, does this still exist?
Defenders dropping out taking an age to get the ball back in play. The benefit is neutralised to attackers it takes that long! You have one minute to get the ball back in play, otherwise 10m penalty under the sticks.
Corner flag. Get it back in play. Great skill by attackers bending round the post to ground the ball. Ryan Hall's try vs Aus at Wembley just one example.
A passed ball hitting a defenders arm when he's committed in the tackle and makes no genuine play at it but it's classed as a knock-on. This one is really frustrating as a supporter on the terraces.

There's probably more as well which should be much higher on the priority list of Mr Cummins to sort.

The clock always gets stopped pretty much instantly when a team is chasing the game and forces a drop out, which makes it even more of a farce, it should be 1 minute and then stopped, like kicks at goal.

Kicks in goal are fine as they are, if the player carrying the ball out slips then they deserve to be punished.

The one that really bugs me is when a team tries to take a quick tap from a 20 meter restart with most of the team in front of them, that should be a penalty against them for offside IMO.

Another one is a player getting up after being tackled and playing on, that should just be a play the ball not penalty like it is for offloading after the tackle.

I agree with most bar from the last, the last game I played in was a couple of years ago before the ruling about aplaying the ball if held. I always wriggled and off loaded most of the time, I got penalised for not hearing the ref which is bloody difficult with your head in someone elses stomach the perople trying to tackle you shouting breathing, I should imagine that it would be worse in a profesional match with the crowd as well. I got penalised for off loading the ball, yet I felt I didn't stop or was held up.