Leeds V Bulls not on sky

what would the score have been?

Time to get rid of the unfair advantage Sky brings?

Definitely, who needs a TV contract?

It evens itself out over the season.

i never said get rid of it, get them in at all games!

yep course it does, tell that to Celtic, Salford and Cas who will be aired 3 times a season to leeds' 10 or so!

I agree. Every game should be shown on Sky. That way I'd never have to leave the house on a weekend.

So are you saying that you get an unfair advatage because you are on TV 10 times or just because you consider the calls went against you.

Exactly, same trys happen in a celtic game they are given trys

Knock ons are only given by video refs now?

Everyone in our household, and every other outside of Leeds, shouted knock on as soon as JJB touched it. The ref would have chalked it off anyway.

That probably says more about who your household were supporting (there's no such thing as a neutral when you support a team in the same division)

The ref obviously saw it as he specifically asked the VR to check for a knock on.

It was a clear knock on and would have been disallowed anyway.

if the ref saw the knock on why didnt he stop play when it happened why play on

As our friends on here pointed out after Kleingate at MM...

Because you don't have to when there's a VR - you can let play go on and have another look at it if you see fit.

Are you saying he didn't see a knock on, then decided to ask the VR to check for a knock on for the sake of it?

To let the VR get a better look than he was able to have himself.

your saying he difinatly saw one so would have chalked it off even if they wasnt a VF. im saying if he definatly thought it was a knock on why go up to the VF

Would we have won at Craven Park earlier in the year had it not been on Sky? I very much doubt the very slight Hull KR knock on would have been picked up without the video referee referaral.

Very good point

The interesting thing about last night is that in both cases last night the touch judges took up positions to say that they thought that there was something wrong with the tries (i.e. they stood approx 2 meteres away from the corner flag.) So in effect Smith went to the VR to confirm what had already been spotted.

Well that time when Webb "diffused" the ball, we would have probably been given benefit of doubt. Whats done is done, it was on sky so get over it.

What if after the "knock-on" a Leeds player had been tackled? The ref had allowed to play to continue, if a Leeds player was then tackled and we scored off the next PTB the VR wouldnt be able to go back and look at it. The ref and TJ's made their decision, IMO, by not stopping play at that point.

Here is a question for the referees on this forum.

Hanley was "offside" many times in his career according to yesterdays ruling.

He would play the ball after being tackled and rather than retire would immediately move down field to wards the opponents tryline.

The attack would break the line and he would then be in a position to recieve the ball and score.

AFAIAA he was NEVER penalised for this but according to this recent ruling on the Webb incident Hanley was always OFFSIDE or rather not elegible to recieve the ball.

So whats your question/point?

BTW Webb never played the ball in the build up to the try, he was stood in Bradfords defensive line.

Barrow had a try disallowed v Wigan in the cup for the same reason as Leeds nut no video ref. Go figure? Why oh why do Leeds fans not take the loss on the chin. All this whining is making you look bad.

If the player had been tackled, the ref could have blown and gone back to the knock on. If it looks likely a try will be scored, far better to let play continue and use the VR and if the try isn't scored then call the offence he felt occurred.