I would have thought tighter player contracts would be able to cover all other 'professional sports' for the length of the contract. I think the Solomona case has to be a wake up call for both League and Union, if players in both codes can retire and leave a contract behind, both codes will become more unstable. Regarding drugs all sports need a consistent code, otherwise we create a second, third and forth option for athletic drug cheats.

Creating a single governing body for both league and union will be a nail in the coffin for league. What needs to happen is for contracts to be tighter to protect both the club and the player better, and the anti-doping rules need to cover all professional sports persons so if they're banned from one sport they're automatically banned from all other professional sport.

The easier option for bans is to give them for a period of games and not a period of time. Give a 30 game ban for drug cheats and it amounts to the same as a 12 month ban, but if a player decides to move away from league then their ban just carries on when they return to the game

Works for me bentleberry until you think about the possibility of said player never likely to return unless he also copped a ban whilst playing union.

If union are happy to take on known drug cheats who are under a massive league suspension then that reflects more on their game than ours

How about that if a player "retires" he should not be allowed to play either code for another three years. That would make them think again.