Yep. Had his left arm on Ablett's right arm all the way through the play the ball process. Nailed on penalty as soon as the ball comes out in those circumstances.

and ablett wouldn't deliberately let go

Except for the incident in the second half when Sinfield had his arm on mcgilvarys left arm at the ptb, ball comes loose and Hicks calls a knock on.

Aye, nailed on......

overall he didn't do too bad,as has been said, he let the game flow but ignored offsides and forward passes

but Leeds got just about every call in their favour in the last 10, i doubt the penalties on ablett and hardaker would have been given if it was the other way round.

but that's the way it goes.

All refs make mistakes.....but the best ones are the ones you 'hardly notice' and have a bit of respect/rapport with the players. Hicks was in that catergory last night.

I find it ironic that it is the generally the VR that now is just as likely to be more inconsistent and plain wrong. ... with the added derogatory indecisive replays we sometimes have to endure. I wonder what changes will be made (again) for next season.

i

See Hudds fans on their board think Leeds got all the generous decisions. The two penalties Hudds kicked in the 2nd half were pretty generous decisions.

This sums up how refs can never win, he had a decent game but still gets called out as biased on no rational basis.

I don't see how anyone can say the penalty against Kopczak wasn't valid. It was probably the most clear cut penalty in the whole game.

Agree. You could argue the ablest penalty. They sometimes go either way but the shoulder charge was cut and dried

the ablett one was very dubious, like i said if that was the other way round it probably wouldn't have been given, there was an instance of the same with McGillvary and it was given as a knock on
the Kopczak one yes, by the rules it was a shoulder charge but only seen because hardaker went down "injured" and so it could be viewed on the screen, again, had it been the other way i'm not sure it would have been given.

i'm not saying he was or is biased i'm saying that certain decisions on another day could have gone the other way, i'm pretty sure there would be a meltdown on here if you had been penalised for the opposition dropping the ball?

You're not saying he was biased....you're just saying he wouldn't give them penalties to Hudds.......yeah same thing mate.

What do you think of the two penalties Hudds got given that they kicked for goal in the 2nd half? Let me guess, perfectly correct decisions?

I wasn't too impressed with Brough's technique on the Kopczak shoulder charge. To clamp Hardaker's legs in that fashion is very dangerous. I initially thought that was what the penalty was for.

I'm with G1 on the Danny Brough "tackle" and thought it was potentially very dangerous and far worse than what Kopczak did. It should be reviewed.

I also am still adamant the Mcgillvary try in the first half should not stand. I'm still convinced it was a knock on in the build up

And the one that Leeming(?) milked by falling forwards into Peacock at the play the ball which gave you a seemingly unassailable 8 point lead? Plenty of those this season where the attacking player has been told to get on with it and stop diving.

Marginal, but I don't think there was conclusive evidence the ball was propelled towards the Leeds line.

Those ones where the player carries on and overruns the ball are always difficult to judge, unless you've got landmarks like pitch markings or lines in the grass to use as a reference point.

I haven't seen it back since Friday but at the time i believed the leading left hand of the Hudds player knocks it forward into his right hand and then with the impact and angle of his hand the right hand propels it backwards.
Now admittedly i had drank a couple of beers but i just remember my first thought was that his left hand knocked it forward.

i thought he got most decisions correct, i haven't said i thought he refereed the game in a bad way just that i thought you got some lucky calls go your way in the last 10 minutes.

there was nothing going until hardaker went down and it got replayed on the big screen, none of the officials or indeed the Leeds players saw anything wrong until it was replayed, judging by the non flailing arms from the players.
if hardaker doesn't go down "injured" then there is no penalty, if it isn't on sky then no penalty.
who is refereeing the game? the man in the middle or the man in the VR booth? there has been a lot of this lately and i don't like it tbh, it's opened up a whole can of worms.

anyway like i said previously, i have no problem with anything apart from our moments of madness/indecisions, thats what lost us the game not the referee!

This is incorrect. Ablett appealed instantly.

The only absolutely indisputable example of cheating on the night was Jack Hughes diving around at Sinfields late penalty. Blatant, premeditated cheating.

I'm confused, are you trying to say Hardaker milked something that wasn't there?

no, im saying if there hadn't been a break in play enabling it to be replayed on the big screen the penalty wouldn't have been given, as im sure none of the officials saw anything, Hicks, as far as i could see had no intention of giving a penalty.

So having the VR at the game enabled the on-field referee to give the correct decision?

Great. Next.

And had the video ref not been there Hudds first try wouldn't have counted.

The "tackle" could and should still be reviewed by the panel at a latest day, even if the game hadn't been televised.

The bottom line for all of us should be consistency....that is what I find the most difficult to comprehend. Is it so difficult to make a ruling that the VR always has OR never has the right to overturn an on field decision/penalise a missed incident? AND then when they do intervene ensure CONSISTENCY.

If there is a clear shoulder charge missed by the on field ref IS it an instant dismissal (Moon), or not (Kopzak)?

With obstruction let's have an absolute clear policy and not leave it open to subjective interpretation. We were denied a 'try of the season' at Wigan which would be easier to accept if you knew there was always going to be consistency on what is still at the moment an apparent subjective opinion.