Peter Clohessy was in a contemplative mood on Saturday at teatime, giving Warren Gatland the quote of the weekend - "I took a punch for you today, and it hurt". But when Clohessy views some video excerpts from the England-Scotland match at Twickenham he will have more food for thought.

Was Clohessy's stamping of Olivier Roumat in Paris in 1996 - for which he got a 26-week suspension - any worse than Martin Johnson's left foot coming down on John Leslie's neck/chest? Whatever about proving intent, or lack of it, the incident at Twickenham looked every bit as bad. That Johnson received only a yellow card from Irish referee David McHugh means the English lock is immune from any further punishment, which merely highlights rugby's need to get its house in order.

It's faintly ridiculous that the punishment would have been more in keeping with the crime had the incident escaped the attention of the officials at the time. Furthermore, it's only marginally less ridiculous that the onus would still have been on the opposition management - the Scots - to cite Johnson had he not been yellow carded.

Opposition managements are too much a part of the rugby community to make a clear and impartial judgment on such issues. For example, on Saturday this might have meant Scottish coach Jim Telfer citing his Lions captain of the summer before last.

In any case, there is often an unwritten code of omerta within rugby whereby opponents will not cite each other after games, in part due to titfor-tat fears. This seems particularly acute in international rugby, though it is the international game which is most under the microscope and therefore should be seen to give the lead.

As the laws are an ass, the punishments for thuggery are accordingly ambivalent. By comparison to Johnson's punishment (and yellow cards are nothing but a cop-out for referees under rugby's disciplinary system anyway) and at the other extreme Clohessy, Austin Healey received a three-week punishment for his stamping on Kevin Putt of London Irish.

That at least served to suspend him from international duty last weekend, as was the case with Trevor Brennan following his dismissal during the St Mary's-Shannon game of last Saturday week. But no less than Clohessy, Brennan can only muse over the refereeing standards Scott Young applied to Brennan that day and, by comparison, Craig Quinnell last Saturday.

Inconsistencies are everywhere and rugby stands indicted for having the least consistent or effective disciplinary system of probably any major team sport in the world.

Even when opposing managements decide to cite, disciplinary tribunals are riddled with politics. Take for example, the hearings into citings against various French clubs or players in this season's European Cup. Most escaped scot free. Could this in any way be related to ERC's acute desire to have the French remain in the European Cup fold?

The lead should come from the International Board, but doesn't. Football's all-encompassing "bringing the game into disrepute" may be a bit loose, but at least it opens up possibilities for punishing crimes that might otherwise go unpunished.

Better late than never, it is encouraging to learn that Alan Hosie, the chairman of the Five Nations Committee and one of Scotland's two representatives on the International Board, will seek to push forward a proposal next April to increase the powers of the independent match commissioner.

It's a shame that last weekend left any sour aftertaste. Given all four games could have swung either way, it gives some substance to the theory that the two-tiered Five Nations is experiencing something of a competitive revival.

Admittedly, Ireland have no right to expect a win over England, and the 13 to 8 odds against Ireland next Saturday week merely underline what a good bet they were at the same odds in Wembley. Still, Saturday week's game is a mouthwatering prospect.

It's been fascinating to watch the Irish management team of Gatland, Donal Lenihan and Philip Danaher methodically build this Irish house from a base of solid set-pieces and defence. By comparison, Wales unveiled some fancy wallpaper on Saturday but had cracked foundations.

Bit by bit Gatland has tinkered here and there. Last season's blunt midfield has been improved by the advent of David Humphreys, the return of a fully fit and improved Jonathan Bell and, thankfully, Kevin Maggs benefiting from regular outings at Bath.

With the front five ensuring Ireland are on the front foot more and more, the back-row has been able to sacrifice a destructive, big-hitting number six in favour of three footballers (think of the Eric Miller-Dion O'Cuinneagain build-up to the Niall Woods break and Keith Wood try).

Hence, the win was also an overdue reward for Gatland's coaching philosophy, the spirit he's engendered in this set-up, and even the IRFU's improved structures. Whereas Wales were hit by injuries to players they do not have control over seven days beforehand, the increased number of home-based IRFU players allowed Gatland to rest all bar two of them last Saturday week.

The clubs may not be happy, but winning the European Cup and having a tilt at the Triple Crown are eminently greater priorities for Irish rugby. The win was also due reward for Gatland's faith in these players, although loyalty to Girvan Dempsey may now exceed loyalty to the victorious XV.

Allowance was made, rightly, for Humphreys after the `intensity shock' of his return to international rugby following almost a year's absence and it's worth noting that after three years, the acclimatisation was even greater for Woods.

He was still a potent runner with ball in hand, yet suffered in the physical stakes defensively against, unluckily for him, the pick of the Welsh backs. Still, you'd wonder how much his presence alleviated some of the place-kicking pressure from Humphreys.

The other area of debate might be the 'three from four' in the back-row, where there could be a temptation to pick the physical presence of Victor Costello ahead of Eric Miller for the first hour on a horses-for-courses principle.

England may not be on a par with France and South Africa but they'll assuredly benefit from Saturday's rusty outing against Scotland; as well, perhaps, as switching from an overly expectant Twickenham to a a more hostile Lansdowne Road.

Yet, confusion seems to reign as to what style exactly they are seeking to play, and to who are their best players in certain positions, primarily out-half. As one Welsh journalist memorably, if a little unfairly, put it on Saturday: "Mike Catt an out-half? My cat is a better out-half than Mike Catt."