Does Rugby League have a cheating problem?

As long as there are rules, there will be always people who try to bend or break those rules. To quote former Leeds Rhinos player Barrie McDermott, "if you're not cheating, you're not trying". The controversial end to Leeds's last-gasp win at Huddersfield has brought gamesmanship or cheating into sharp focus.

For those who didn't see, Leeds were trailing Huddersfield by two points going into the last few minutes. Chris Hill was then sin binned for a dangerous lift. Replays showed that the 'victim', Leeds' Richie Myler, had dug his feet into the floor and propelled himself upwards, giving the incorrect perception that he had been lifted into such a position. Hill was sin binned and Leeds won the game in the next set, taking advantage of the extra man.

With the exception of Leeds fans and the increasingly hysterical and excitable Sky Sports pundit Jon Wilkin, this did not sit comfortably with many people. Some were outraged that the 'honest' nature of our sport has given way to players staying down to draw penalties. That is increasingly common, Huddersfield's Danny Levi stayed down for an age in an attempt to draw the referee's attention to a high shot earlier in the game. This was an act criticised by his coach Ian Watson in the post match press conference.

The perception of our sport always being honest is revisionist though. Players have always tried to get around the rules. They are professionals who are paid to win. If they don't win, questions are asked. Sometimes, contracts are not renewed. The pressure is enormous.

Some have called for Myler to be banned for his act of, what many including I, saw as an attempt to deceive and cheat. If we were to do that, the question begs, where should the line be drawn? What is ban worthy and what is not?

If Huddersfield had stripped the ball two-on-one in the resulting set and the official missed it, should that player be banned for gamesmanship, cheating or whatever other synonym you choose to use?

Should Chris Hill be suspended for attempting to deceive the official in raising his arm in celebration when he was obviously held up over the line last night, as he sought to claim a try? If not, why not? Where is the line drawn and why would you draw it at that point? What aspect of rule or convention breaking is part of the game and where does it go too far? And if suspensions were imposed, how could inconsistency be avoided?

Myler's actions last night was a particularly egregious example but the two examples above show how finding solutions to the perceived problem is tricky. Of course, in non-televised games, without the benefit (if you wish to call it that) of a video referee means that the stopping of the game and retrospective review mid-game cannot take place.

On several occasions this season, players have felt potentially illegal contact, stayed down and the perpetrator punished, with the victim playing on. It is impossible to identify whether the victim is genuinely hurt or is using whatever means necessary to gain an advantage for his team. Moving into the territory where players are suspended for staying down when they take an illegal contact flies in the face of both logic and player welfare. 

If we were to prevent the video referee from intervening in matters of foul play, then we risk a situation where an incident of foul play that is obvious on a cursory replay goes unpunished. Again, this does not further player welfare. There are no easy answers. The truth of the matter is that televised Rugby League and non-televised Rugby League are increasingly resembling different sports. Both in how it is played and officiated.

There have been some suggestions that players should self-police, but what is their motive for doing so? Had Richie Myler not acted in the way that he did last night, Leeds would probably lose the match. Had that happened and both Salford and Castleford win this evening (and both are favourites), Leeds would be in 7th place going into the final two rounds. Instead, they are now 5th and are heavy favourites to claim a play off spot and have a tilt at Old Trafford.

Myler's acts have been rewarded. Even if some got their wish and he was banned for two matches, for example, it probably still would have been worthwhile to claim the two points.

I don't mind controversy and talking points in Rugby League, especially like last night when I had no interest in which side won! The conclusion of last night's game was as dramatic as it comes, but there is a strong argument that the drama came at the cost of some integrity. To have a leading summariser lauding an act of cheating was an especially low ebb.

But in Rugby League much as in life, there are no easy answers. Perhaps that is a good thing, If there was, we would risk taking away some of the thrill of live sport.