So not someone with expertise then?

Case concluded

A typical RFL clamp down that lasts 5 minutes then. No wonder they are rarely successful.

Whilst I agree that the wrestling at the tackle is messy & needs stamping out there is one problem with stopping it, as the sides are now 10 meters apart the wrestling /holding up is needed to alow the defence to set, the player who goes quickly to the ground gains an unfair advantage as opposed to one who attempts to break the tackle & gain ground. If the referees were to penalise for a voluntary tackle it might stop the practice.Jamie Bovil when he played for us was a prime example A great big hulk of a man who droped to the ground as soon as he was touched. The real problem is that as we alter rules to combat one supposed problem it often raises other unforseen issues. The game just needs to reflect & make its mind up what it wants to do or more important what the public want to watch. A slow war of atrition type game might be what people want? lets face it Sarecens got 45,000 to watch thier rubish this week end.

THAT WAS JUST STEVE GANSON BEING A C*CK....

I’m still not sure we’ve got the balance right here. I know we’ve followed the NRLs interpretation of the rules, but having watched their grand final the rucks are still much cleaner & quicker than ours & the game doesn’t seem to suffer as much.

Here’s an idea. Why not allow a maximum of 2 players to be involved in a tackle at any given time when the ball carrying team is inside their own half. Once the ball has been carried into your half & you are defending your line there should be no restrictions.

It would be much harder for the defensive team to continually slow the PTB & pin the opposition deep in their own half if they couldn’t get extra bodies into the tackle. This might also encourage teams to be a bit more adventurous & attack from deep.

It wouldn’t the easiest rule to enforce, but would it be any more difficult than the ball stripping rule we already have? Just a thought.