Well here we are at the business end of the season with a playoff game at home to york in front of the premier sports cameras. Playoff rugby tends to be more intense then what you see during the regular season so i would expect this to be a tough game. Based on what i have seen of york this season including there 2 games with us i think we will be too strong for them across the park and come out winners 30-10.

Jack Smith in the middle for this one.
Pretty inept performance at Widnes and as he is offside happy we’ll have to watch that area in particular along with a squeaky clean play the ball.

I apologize if I am wrong, but keeping onside and play the ball correctly, are they not basics?

I agree totally about playing the ball correctly but the offsides are given at the ref's whim. Even with the ptb once in the Widnes game Smith penalised Fax, I forget which player, when it was clear a defender was all over the Fax player. That's just basic refereeing but we do seem to lose a lot of 50/50 calls. I know we are all biased but we just need the rub of the green now and then. As for the York game I think we have proved over the season and in the two games against them this year that we are the better team. Keep the mistakes down and yes, the penalties, and we should run out comfortable winners. Fax 32v14 York. Up The Fax!

Hudd-Shay, I only see the view from Fax tv and the one camera angle so have to rely on that, it does seem referees in the main are whimsical about play the ball, does not matter which level of rugby you watch, players do get lazy, not playing with the foot but lifting the leg and pushing the ball through, opposing players do always try to slow the game down by laying on or turning the man on his back, agree needs more consistency,. Saying that the players know what certain refs are like and should be able to adapt accordingly.

Absolutely right about the basics but some refs seem to be keener on policing certain areas of the game and where Jack Smith is concerned offside is one of these, we get pinged more for being offside when he is in the middle than any other ref.
Against Widnes we got penalised at the ptb on several occasions for not playing it correctly and if we aren't doing so this leads to the pressure being unnecessarily put on ourselves instead of the opposition and giving penalties away when in possession is a coach killer and needs to be addressed.

On the other hand you can see identical ptb incidents that can go either way, one call will be penalty attack for interference another call will be penalty defence for incorrect play the ball.

The incident mentioned by Hudds is one example.
On the first play a yard from their line Arundel tries to play the ball and as he bends down to do so Craven and another push towards him rocking him slightly backwards which causes him to pause, steadies himself and before he gets chance to play it he gets penalise.

It’ seems there’s always one, earlier in the season it was any head contact and you were off which has now balanced out a bit,getting the ruck and ptb right still seems to be alluding the officials and remains as this seasons inconsistent annoying rule of the year.

Just putting forward an alternative point of view...I think the refs have actually been a bit more consistent than is being suggested in terms of those play-the-ball issues. If you look at the Arundel one at Widnes (the one on the Widnes line) - he is penalised for not standing up to play the ball. Yes Craven gives him a nudge but I have seen this so often this year that I think either the smarter players such as Craven have caught on, or players are generally being coached to do this ie if the player in possession puts the ball on the ground before he has regained his feet, just give him a nudge and he will fall over - this highlights to the ref that the ball carrier has started the play-the-ball movement before he has regained his feet, and the penalty correctly goes against the ball carrier. Of course this incenses the crowd, because they see a player pushed over and then have the penalty awarded against him, but it's the correct decision. In case you think I'm being biased against Fax - here's a similar incident from Fev's home game against Fax. Check out about 30 mins 20 second in...Lockwood tries to play the ball, Wood is all over him, Lockwood puts the ball down with one knee on the floor and Wood gives him a nudge, he falls over and it's Lockwood who is penalised. Incensed the Fev crowd, but correct decision. The ref? Jack Smith. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mR2MC0NIfbM&t=4220s

Just putting forward an alternative point of view...I think the refs have actually been a bit more consistent than is being suggested in terms of those play-the-ball issues. If you look at the Arundel one at Widnes (the one on the Widnes line) - he is penalised for not standing up to play the ball. Yes Craven gives him a nudge but I have seen this so often this year that I think either the smarter players such as Craven have caught on, or players are generally being coached to do this ie if the player in possession puts the ball on the ground before he has regained his feet, just give him a nudge and he will fall over - this highlights to the ref that the ball carrier has started the play-the-ball movement before he has regained his feet, and the penalty correctly goes against the ball carrier. Of course this incenses the crowd, because they see a player pushed over and then have the penalty awarded against him, but it's the correct decision. In case you think I'm being biased against Fax - here's a similar incident from Fev's home game against Fax. Check out about 30 mins 20 second in...Lockwood tries to play the ball, Wood is all over him, Lockwood puts the ball down with one knee on the floor and Wood gives him a nudge, he falls over and it's Lockwood who is penalised. Incensed the Fev crowd, but correct decision. The ref? Jack Smith. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mR2MC0NIfbM&t=4220s

PTB and ruck issues are far more part of the game in the British game than for example the NRL where you hardly ever see it resulting in a cleaner ruck, faster ptb and faster game as a result.
That’s the place to start to fix it.
Using the Arundel incident as an example why did he not cleanly get to his feet?
Because of interference from the defensive line when trying to do so and with a full set to go had nothing to gain from trying to get what he already had, even the commentators including Widnes through and through KB said he had been harshly treated.
Once the tackle has been completed and the ref has called held / move whoever initiates contact after that should be penalised.
If it’s the attacker by moving forward of the mark it’s clear enough to see and it should be him.
If it’s the defender by pushing down or out on the player in possession then it should be him.
In both cases they are the ones causing the contact and the issues.
No doubt about the role of being coached on to exploit it like they did a season ago when deliberately passing the ball into a prone player near the ruck and geting a penalty off the back of it until the penny dropped and the opposite ruling came in and it stopped within a couple of weeks.
In any case coached or not whoever initiates the contact gets penalised.

Watch the Premier Sports footage again. It's a slow PTB because there are 3 or 4 men in the tackle, but once they have disengaged, Arundel clearly puts the ball on the ground whilst he still has one knee on the floor. That's an illegal PTB, it's not even remotely contentious, and as much as I have admired Kevin Brown's punditry this year, he's flat out wrong there.
As an aside, he's also not totally straight on to the goal line, which is also illegal..

But it’s not an aside and that 20 or 30 second period of the game is blatantly contentious.

Please follow your own advice and watch it again as a whole in the correct order instead of one small part of it out of sequence because the first offence was Widnes being yards offside at the scrum leading up to the play, the second offence was Craven being offside at the play the ball, both are penalty offences which happened before the ptb but weren’t given.

1 out of 3 in the wrong order can’t be the right decisions or end up with the right outcome and it’s the ref who was flat out wrong.

Examples of inconsistencies are, earlier in the game Arundel again gets penalised for holding onto the defenders leg whilst in possession at the ptb, fair enough yet when Fax are attacking minutes later Widnes clearly pull back a Fax players leg at the ptb, the ref see’s it but waves play on.

It’s not only happening against a Fax, Aston on 18 minutes gets tackled fairly and with barely any contact on him doesn’t regain his feet, does a flapping fish act and throws the ball away at the ptb but gets the penalty.



Whilst you’re looking back read my first post which clearly stated that against Widnes we were penalised for not playing the ball correctly on several occasions whilst in possession and it needed fixing for tomorrow’s game because Smith would see it along with the offsides, at no point did I say we shouldn’t have been.

Consistency is definitely the word. Yes, the coaches job is partly to examine the ref's and train the players accordingly. Up The Fax!

Ok I watched it again. I agree that Widnes were offside at the scrum, but that's on the touch judge, not the ref. Craven wasn't offside at the PTB and I'm not sure what you are seeing there, he clearly has his foot behind the line.

But all that is kind of missing the point, it's the relentless bagging of referees that I struggle with. The modern game is really hard to officiate because coaching methods have made the ruck/play-the-ball area so competitive and messy. For instance defenders are coached to keep their hands on the ball as long as possible during the tackle and that means that refs are faced with a tricky decision over and over as to whether they have delayed the PTB or not. Once the ref has shouted held, how long is the defender allowed to keep his hand on the ball or on the tackled player before the ref penalises him - 0.2 seconds, 0.4 seconds, 0.6 seconds etc? It's going to be a judgement call every time. that's why you end up with comments on every team's forum such as the one earlier on this thread saying "we never seem to get the 50-50 calls", because there are probably about 20 or 30 of these in every game and fans remember the ones that went against them.

Arundel..that's the one I was thinking of.

So when the defensive line moves yards offside before the ball clears the scrum your saying the ref can’t see it and can’t make the call, sorry I disagree and your 100% wrong about Craven, watch it again his right foot is always in front of the line, he’s offside and in the reference to decisions I never mentioned 50/50 calls all go against Fax.

Anyway and moving on.

Actually in case you missed it, the point I was making was very simple which clearly pointed out that “our” in house discipline would have to be in order for the York game as per the thread.
Namely if “we” stray even slightly offside and having given a number of penalties away when in possession last time out “we” would also have to be squeaky clean at the ptb or we would be heavily penalised again if “we” were not doing it right, it was all about us, how can that be classed as “relentless bagging of referees”?

On the bigger picture the ptb remains one of the main areas of the game where penalty calls in identical situations can go either way it’s just a fact.

The point here is, because of all the messing around clearly beyond 10th’s of a second, when watching live without the use of post game microscopic analysis and multiple replays to show whether it was the correct call or not (as per your Lockwood / Wood example) causes more frustration than almost anything else at almost every game (as it did at Featherstone that day) and consequently needs looking at.
You will never have perfection but after all it is a live sport which in that setting shouldn’t have these anomalies.

With that in mind rather than “bagging” the ref, the clubs, through disruptive ruck / ptb coaching and as a result producing these so called “smarter players” you mentioned were highlighted as part of the problem.

Trying to be proactive and positive a solution was proposed and an example of how it is currently working to a much higher standard in the NRL was provided as a model to follow.

Will it happen, very unlikely, why and this is the part I struggle with, the constant defensive denial approach and it’s all “bagging the ref” claim when’s there clearly are issues just fails to see the problem and fails to see the need for change.

Respectfully, I don't think you know the rules, do you? Craven is the marker. He doesn't have to be behind the line. If the play the ball is 12 inches from the line, as it was, and his foot is six inches from the line, he's onside. In any case, his left foot was behind the line (and his right foot in front of it) and my understanding is that would be classed as being behind the line even if he weren't the marker.

W t f come on fax

Cannot believe what I have just listened too. F+-k

That hurt massively but York turned up and we didn’t .

Oh well. York played the better game we a bit out of sorts I our attack and defence. Two massive gaping holes let York in for 2 trys. It has been a good season for us although get less fundings for losing tonight. Our lads and coaching staff and all concerned in running the club should be proud of what we have achieved this year

Bottom line is we didnt deliver tonight . Tactics need refreshing unfortunately . You just have to keep moving

We played how we were at the start of the season. Great season after that poor start, but we were pretty awful today. Unlucky in part, Lachlan's gift to them in the first half (he should probably have batted it dead for a drop-out), Adam getting the ball dislodged (fairly, imo), and hitting the post with the penalty, but with a pretty much full squad available, there's no way we should have lost today. Well done to York for coming up with a game-plan to disrupt us, but bad on us for not being able to react to that.

Grix utterly outflanked by Ford. Will he learn from it? I doubt it. Unlucky though York were Sensational.

Without watching it back to get a better viewing, live you could see it coming, York were better than I expected running it in hard and made big meters on their exit sets with a Harris looking more of a threat the longer the game went on and fast line speed closed down our attack.
We made the usual amount of mistakes that gifted them a couple of scores and missed a straight forward kick when they didn’t.
Well done York deserved it on the night.

Totally agree. York’s line speed was faster and more aggressive than ours. We stood still and let them run at us and that sort of defence doesn’t work.