Des Haslers comments regarding a team still getting a point after being beaten in extra time with the winning side getting an extra point has a lot of sympathy in many quarters as it seems patently unfair that a side who is square after 80 minutes is treated the same as a team beaten by 50. The main (and correct)argument mounted against this is that we are then creating a game which results in more points on offer than is usual for a normal fixture. I agree that we shouldn't have more points on offer simply because of a draw. A simple and easy way to fix the situation whereby 1.we are not issuing extra points solely because of a draw 2.we are rewarding a side for being square after 80 3 the winning side gets a bonus for winning in extra time but does not achieve the same result as a side that wins outright 4 the excitement of extra time is maintained (which should be a full 10 minutes with tries the only points on offer and penalties differential) is to move the soccer system whereby a win generates 3 points. This would mean an outright win equates to 3 points, an extra time win 2 points, an extra time loss 1 point and a 90 minute draw 1 point each.It would also have the added bonus of reducing the chance a side misses the semis on for and against.A scoring system like the above would rarely result in ties after 26 rounds. This system would better reflect the achievement of both sides and prevent the ludicrous situation of the warriors getting the same result against Penrith as we did against the Dogs and not have a situation where extra points are created for a draw. The only better scenario is to go back the good old days where a draw is a valid outcome and each side gets 1 point The above scenario and the old school draw are the only sensible options and as such will not get any serious consideration from anyone who runs our game.