I think you are using legalistic arguments
NO!!!
I am trying make rugby sense of the laws, and I have a very good historical precedent from the 2016 Laws[LAWS]12.1 THE OUTCOME OF A KNOCK-ON OR THROW FORWARD
(a) Unintentional knock-on or throw forward. A scrum is awarded at the place of
infringement.
(b) Unintentional knock-on or throw forward at a lineout. A scrum is awarded 15 metres
from the touchline.
(c)
Knock-on or throw forward into the in-goal. If an attacking player knocks-on or throws forward
in the field of play and the ball goes into the opponents’ in-goal and it is made dead
there, a scrum is awarded where the knock-on or throw forward happened.
(d)
Knock-on or throw forward inside the in-goal. If a player of either team knocks-on or
throws-forward inside the in-goal, a 5-metre scrum is awarded in line with the place of
infringement not closer than 5 metres from the touchline.[/LAWS]
(My bold)
That wording was in the Laws from the 2000 re-write on, so it is what players should be used to. Unfortunately the lax wording in the new laws is unhelpful. However it is perfectly possible to interpret it in the 2016 sense. I claim that makes Rugby sense.
to avoid giving the defenders the advantage they want after the knock on (ie to play on, and touch down for a 22 , just as they would be able to do if the knock on hadn't happened)
What they have "earned" is the right to a scrum. A 22 would be something given to them by the referee getting it wrong.