Without a union I suspect the chance of a strike is almost zero unless the disciplinary decisions go even more extreme. I’ve joked about the “Wigan” decisions but some of them eg the Crowther one are bizarre in the extreme.

The big worry I have it what that means at international level (should we actually be allowed by the NRL to play any proper games going forward). There is no doubt the game in this country is being changed in a big way but that isn't the case in the NRL. In my lifetime watching GB/England verses the Aussies and Kiwis, you've been able to say those sides are more skilful than us but you'd never say they're tougher than us and that we couldn't cope with them in an aggressive contest but when we're playing to such different rules, were they have State of Origin and high end league fixtures being played with far more leeway and their players are conditioned to that, we could get absolutely blown away in every facet of the game.

You look at this game on Saturday and more leeway will be given on the contact heights. There will be zero adjustment needed for Penrith but our lads will now be playing under different rules. You could say it's happy days as our lads can now go higher but presumably they've been working on their techniques to avoid that for months on end now and it's as easy as just switching it on and off. As a country we're putting ourselves at a big disadvantage in these type of contests.

The resulting international chaos seems to me to be only one of many things that haven't been considered.

The last minute fudge with the Penrith game is 100% proof of that. But as you say, we won't be able to fudge it in World Cups or Test series that are further down the line, as too much time will then have gone for our players to adapt back to playing the real thing.

So, if 2025 goes ahead as planned, it will certainly be the end of international RL ... at least where British players are concerned, which most likely will have a domino effect on the domestic game, probably in due course at amateur level as well as professional (which will be much sooner).

I hear what people say about trying to reduce head injuries. It's a serious matter. But heavy contact between athletes is a fundamental aspect of rugby league football. There is simply no way round that. No one is supposed to get hurt, but accidents are accidents, and you can't prevent them happening in a sport like this by threatening draconian punishments. The only way to guarantee there'll be no injuries is to ban the game, which is what they are effectively doing ... but only, very mysteriously, in the UK.

If the RFL are insistent on trying to eradicate risk - and it can only be risk to themselves (in other words, to ensure they won't have to pay out big compensation) - the only way forward, as I see it, is to try and establish some kind of legally sound contract for players, whereby they accept a personal risk if they're going to participate. Surely it can't be impossible to do that? There are many other dangerous sports in the world, which involve potential head injuries - NFL, NRL, ice hockey, boxing, MMA - I just don't understand why it's only us who are facing this threat.

All feels like it comes down to the fact the game is skint. Money can make problems go away in most walks of life.

It's certainly been the root of all disasters in our game, clubs going bust, salary cap, players defecting to Union and the NRL, and now, finally this.

We could try tick and pass!