19 page thread (so far) on the Phil Bentham conspiracy theory. Hard cheese to go with those sour grapes? FML viewtopic.php?f=28&t=466568

19 page thread (so far) on the Phil Bentham conspiracy theory. Hard cheese to go with those sour grapes? FML viewtopic.php?f=28&t=466568

I have no interest in the Wigan board. But the fact that we also think Bentham has a down on us would suggest to me that he probably gets most things right most of the time.
Now as for James Child.....

Troll

Aren't like 14 of those pages from back in 2010?

Quote ="krisleeds"19 page thread (so far) on the Phil Bentham conspiracy theory. Hard cheese to go with those sour grapes? FML viewtopic.php?f=28&t=466568'" Indeed, what kind of deluded, paranoid, sore loser fan base would rely on conspiracy theories about referees. Anyway everyone knows Phil Bentham only got the gig because he balls deep in vag the weekend before.

Quote ="krisleeds"19 page thread (so far) on the Phil Bentham conspiracy theory. Hard cheese to go with those sour grapes? FML viewtopic.php?f=28&t=466568'" Indeed, what kind of deluded, paranoid, sore loser fan base would rely on conspiracy theories about referees. Anyway everyone knows Phil Bentham only got the gig because he balls deep in vag the weekend before.

And guess which referee has been given the England vs France international friendly even though he was deemed not good enough to even be a reserve ref in the recent playoff semi's.........hmmm, hmmmm....step forward Mr Cushy Gig Every Now and Again.

Dunno, the RFL list James Child as the ref for the international but he was the video ref for the Wigan v Hudds semi final so it cant be him. Is it Fred Lindop?

You do know the difference between reserve ref and video ref don't you? Oh and Child was Touch Judge at Old Trafford with Bentham and Silverwood doing the video ref gig.

Yeah, a video ref is directly involved in making decisions that effect the outcome of the game, very very rarely does the reserve ref have that privilege.

Are you trying to argue that Child wasnt good enough to be reserve ref but was good enough to be video ref? i just thought you had made an honest mistake, but it seems you have a very strange view of officiating hierarchy. its a good job you doubled down on your error.

To be fair, if we'd lost by 2 points some on here might have been clutching at straws as well. Still makes funny reading though

Or you cocked up and are backtracking!(still unsure of his role at Old Trafford?)

He was doing the VR duties with one of Bentham/Silverwood (can't recall which). As you saw when they use to show you the VR's watching the screen last year only one is really in charge of making the decision, I'd hazard a guess it was the latter. Also picking Bentham and Silverwood as reserve refs meant they had much more faith in them taking over the game should an injury occur. A faith they repeatedly don't have in Child when it comes to semis and finals.

Having watched the game a few times it is more apparent that some of those Wigan errors/penalties were the result of tiredness as a result of the pressure Leeds were applying. The forward pass and the tip tackle on Hall. You can moan about decisions all you want but the point is Wigan just werent good enough regardless of the "knock on" interpretation. It went sideways anyway. Get over it.

Now you making things up about the decision making process of the VR's to compound it. How silly. Do you want to find out the decision making process of the 2 VR's or are you going to double down again?

Though I do enjoy listening to the logic of an idiot. The RFL deliberately give Child a role where he will definitely make decisions effecting the big matches because they dont have the faith in him to have him as reserve referee for the very very rare occasion they are needed. And this is a thread mocking the Wigan fans for ridiculous idiotic conspiracy theories.

So who was the senior ref on VR that night then?

Who were the touch judges at Old Trafford, you figured out that yet?

Again, you might want to check out the decision making process for VR's. Or make something new up, that seems to be going well for you.

And as you already know, James Child was a touch judge in the Grand Final, apparently, and oddly, because the RFL didnt think him good enough to sit on the sidelines having no influence on the game.

Yup, my particular favourite -:

[iMe too, we're a punch and a horrible refereeing decision away from having 3 consecutive titles. I think Wane knows what he's doing.[/i

I like the glass not only half-full but overflowing outlook. It should be engraved on the trophy.

The incessant whinging from the pies is really the cherry on top of the greatest season in the clubs history.

The more I see Moons try I can't see where anyone is getting knock on from?

It's a try, it was a try on field and a try on review. If it went up as a no try it would have got over turned. At no point does the ball get knocked on or go forward.

There's an argument that the ball goes forward from McGuire's hand, strikes his knee and then goes backwards. As he neither regathers nor kicks the ball before it's touched by another player, under the letter of the law that would constitute a knock-on IIRC.

It wouldn't if it hits his knee as that would be deemed a kick. The laws define a kick as something along the lines of: propelling the ball with any part of the leg from knee to toe but excluding the heel. I thought it hit his thigh which would make it a knock on.

Edit: well, maybe not thigh but well above the knee.

Oh yeah I get that I'm just enjoying baiting the pies in the off season.

If it goes backwards off McGuire it's not a knock on is it? Doesn't he have to knock it forward in to the ground or another player?

Apparently not. My reading of it is that he has to either regain or kick the ball, otherwise it's a knock-on.

=#8000BFThe laws, plus various terms from the glossary:

"Knock On means to knock the ball towards the opponent's dead ball line with hand or arm"

Accidental <knock-on> 2. If, after knocking-on accidentally, the player knocking-on regains or kicks the ball before it touches the ground, a goal post, cross bar or an opponent, then play shall be allowed to proceed.
Otherwise play shall stop and a scrum shall be formed except after the fifth play-the-ball

"Kick means imparting motion to the ball with any part of the leg (except the heel) from the knee to toe inclusive."

So, if ball travels forward prior to hitting leg above knee then rules suggest knock-on. If it hits the knee, he's deemed to have kicked it so play on.

That's how I saw it when I watched the game back. He knocks it on, it hits his knee which makes it look like it's come backwards.

I still think we were lucky it was given.

Doesn't matter now though

I'd still think that it was fine even reading that. Realistically other than the judgement of intent, what McGuire did was no different to a player knocking the ball forward then palming it back.

Hit's Mcguire's knee and goes back.

Clearest try I've ever seen.