Penalties: does the punishment now exceed the crime?

It's a few days after the event, but this article from the SMH on Friday is worth discussing.

The effect of penalties is more significant than ever before: as the article says, one in three tries now result from penalties (and this is without considering the repeat sets gained and the subsequent tries or the significant tiring of the opposition defence from having to defend multiple sets).

Curiously, this does not seem to be deciding matches: home teams are faring better than they have over recent years and the Cowboys - Melbourne game went Melbourne's way despite a huge penalty count against them (although it is hard to imagine any other team defending as well as Melbourne did and overcoming such a hurdle). But as the game continues to get faster and the emphasis on speed from dummy half increases, surely the relationship between penalties and results will strengthen.

A possible solution is to "grade" penalties. This could be done where the penalty for more minor infringements is merely a re-start of the tackle count, rather than a long kick downfield.

Or, offences could be graded and a set metre penalty could be enforced (as is the case in the NFL). Sure, the grading of offences could be difficult and having the on-field referee to determine the grade whilst carrying out so many other duties could prove a troublesome task, but it would overcome the current situation, where a penalty received in the middle of the field usually results in further yardage gained than a penalty received near the sideline.

Also, the yardage gained from a penalty would not be contingent on the quality of kick or the weather conditions (i.e. a strong wind) on the day.

Whatever the solution, something must be done in this area and done soon, otherwise the pressure on referees (and the importance of their decisions) will only increase: that can't be good for the game.