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.

refereeing is always subjective as different people are making decisions. look at that try at wigan. people on here, leeds fans, were split as to if it was ruled out or not. we can't decide but refs should?
I moan, like everyone else at referees but the fact is I can understand, at ground level and 100 mph how they get things wrong. the video ref should never be wrong but sadly they are. to many times.

I asked silverwood on twitter why he never asked the VR when smith knocked on in the wigan game why he gave them the scrum. I said it was an easy one to get wrong but check. he said you can only check if the balls gone dead.
well either he's a liar or the rules changed overnight because him and all the others check all the time now

But play had stopped because he had awarded a scrum to Wigan after judging Moon to have knocked on?? Before play restarted they had replayed the incident 3/4 times on the big screen.

he said the ball had to go out of play, should have made it clearer

On ask the ref they've said in the past that the VR can be involved if play has stopped (eg an injury) exactly what happened on Friday and against what you were told!

I'll try to find the tweet and post it

The system was indeed modified overnight. On the Monday after that game Silverwood's and the video ref's decisions were reviewed by his fellow referees (as is usual). apart from determining the obstruction no- try was incorrectly ruled out on a 2-1 vote on the night they also agreed that refs could consult for knock ons etc in dead ball situations like that scrum call. Officially at the time Silverwood wasn't allowed to ask.

This i have issues with over the years since the VR has been used at t.v games various Refs have asked them to clarify situations whether the ball was dead or not indeed in some games VR's have intervened during stoppages and tipped the on field Ref up of foul play.
The whole system imo is mis-used and like i tweeted to Silverwood on the night Tad asked he was lying it was only a couple of weeks prior during a Cas game iirc he'd given a KO against Cas and whilst the scrum was being set he asked the VR to double check when he'd watched the big screen replay & spotted he'd got it wrong.

for me the main thing is getting the decision right. if that means a whisper in the refs ears so be it

I see where you're coming from but the whole VR thing's riddled with inconsistency. Take the Kopczak penalty on Friday as an example; had Hardaker not been injured then play would have continued. But thanks to the stoppage the incident was highlighted. Happens time and again with obstruction; if there's a score then the most innocuous offences are picked up whereas at any other time only the more blatant offences are penalised. And if the VR is to have a whisper in the on-field ref's ear, why not do it to correct the myriad knock on at the ptb/interference decisions that are incorrectly called on a regular basis? It does happen but only on a seemingly-random basis.

I've never liked the VR concept but I like its application less and less. If we need to have it (and I understand fully the argument about TV replays highlighting refereeing mistakes) then for god's sake take it back to where it was used to adjudicate on try/no try decisions only.

But Hardaker was injured BECAUSE of the Kopczak offence. It wasn't some unlucky coincidence.

No. It was a lucky one.