The past two NRL grand finals have excited the revolutionaries into dreaming up rules to counter the code's predictability and reliance on power, yet there was little evidence of a need for change at the conference of players, coaches and administrators.
Delegates were asked to rate 20 issues, such as interchange, role of the video referee, the grapple tackle and two referees, with half the topics consigned to the "don't waste time discussing this issue" category. Of the topics discussed, the debate ended with half of them dispatched to a "don't change the rule" category.
In other words, maintenance of the status quo was the preferred course at the end of the code's centenary season. Given the fact 44 per cent of the 100 delegates were current administrators, and most NRL coaches attended, as well as two or three players per club, that is understandable - employees don't want change to their working conditions in a season when crowds, TV ratings and sponsorships have been stable.
But the Storm's sweep through the 2007 grand final and the Sea Eagles' overwhelming counter in a virtual training run against a spent Melbourne side this year have raised questions about the power game. "Where is the spontaneity, the unpredictability?" ask some of the code's longest-serving officials, such as Titans chairman Paul Broughton.
Where are the clever tap moves and scrum plays? A standard set of six tackles is two runs from dummy-half, a block play, followed by a double block, ending in a kick to the corners.
"As the game progresses, victory will go to the biggest and strongest," Broughton says.
In western Sydney's junior representative teams, read Polynesian for "biggest and strongest". Yet only half the delegates at Thursday's meeting voted to lower the number of interchange players, meaning the bigger guys will still be running at the little guys towards the end of games.
The two rugby codes are the only team sports in which a player cannot kick, pass or throw the ball to a player in front of him. Therefore, we can't evolve any defence, other than a straight, single line, with a winger dropping back towards the end of the tackle count. Coaches have devised left and right defences, slide, up and in, up and hold but, as Broughton says, "In reality, it all gets down to one on one.
"There is no 4-5-1, no 4-3-3, no 4-4-2 as in soccer, no zone as in basketball, no 3-4, 4-3 keys and myriad complex reads as in NFL."
The rugby league defensive line has been moved back one metre to three to five to its current 10 metres to encourage attack but when the ball is passed, the tacklers have been advancing since 1908. Like rugby league, American football evolved from rugby union but forward passes are allowed in the NFL. The "hail Mary" long throws into the end zone and Pittsburgh's "immaculate reception" have taken on religious overtones.
Supporters of the straight-line defence argue it makes the two rugby codes appealing to TV insofar as the viewer can see the ball most of the time. They compare it with AFL, for which the lounge lizard must guess the position of the ball.
AFL crowds are bigger, and it must be conceded there is also more spontaneity and fast bursts of scoring in that game. Nevertheless, forward passes haven't destroyed the essential appeal of NFL to TV and the rich broadcasting contracts it enjoys. For this reason, some are coming around to the view rugby league should experiment with one offside play per set of six.
One play in which a man can receive the ball from a kick - not a pass - while standing forward of the kicker. It would certainly create some panic in the straight-line defence as players rush back to cover him, offering opportunities for the attack to exploit those gaps.
Other philosophers simply say the two rugby codes should unite and create a hybrid game, although the mood of this week's conference was to take league further from union, certainly in terms of time-wasting tactics.
Yet the strongest support at the meeting for the status quo came from league's emeritus professor, Ron Massey, who has been around so long, his ears still sting from the "Big Bang". He declared Manly's victory the best performance in a grand final he had seen. "Manly would have beaten any team from any era," he says. "And they beat a team of representative players 40-nil. If you want anything more exciting, watch bungee jumping. Our game is in a great state."