It makes me laugh when I see people like Rogue's with his say what you see attitude or Danny Brough's "What's missing about that?" opinion. Whilst I wish I could clear this up using elaborate mathematical equations and physics, I think a basic knowledge of geometry and common sense will do.

This all revolves around why the two angles appear to show different outcomes, this is simple - perspective! And how people point to how the ball looks inside the sticks without even thinking of perspective just beggars belief.

[url=http://s610.photobucket.com/user/StHelensRovers/media/Broughs%20Drop%20Goal%20Analysed/wideexplaination_zpsc0384ba9.jpg.html[/url

From this angle, we can see the moment the ball is kicked, it is roughly 6ft from the approximate spot of the post - using the pitch lines (I've gone over them in white). The yellow asterisk is where the ball would be on the try line (all measurements are of course approximate).

[url=http://s610.photobucket.com/user/StHelensRovers/media/Broughs%20Drop%20Goal%20Analysed/behindgoal_zps4184ad6a.jpg.html[/url

So from behind the goal, the thing that is catching everyone out is how the ball looks inside the sticks for most of its journey. We can now use the same reference spots from the previous photo (I have changed the hue so the lawn lines appear sharper). We know the ball is 6ft outside the sticks, but look - it already appears inside the sticks from this point. The fact is that the ball needs to make up 6ft of ground.

[url=http://s610.photobucket.com/user/StHelensRovers/media/Broughs%20Drop%20Goal%20Analysed/perspective_zps2945fe98.jpg.html[/url

Here is the true perspective of the top of the sticks. At this point, given as I say I am not qualified to work out distance x time etc, we rely on common sense. Does the ball appear inside the corridor of the lines? Of course that is only one still and proves nothing, but I would say think about this perspective and the reference points I have given and watch the video yourself. I have examined it and I am very confident it didn't


And that is why, on that angle ^ the ball looks to be sneaking in (if you imagine the lines not to be there)...


[url=http://s610.photobucket.com/user/StHelensRovers/media/Broughs%20Drop%20Goal%20Analysed/circled_zps9658a94d.jpg.html[/url

...but on this angle the ball appears wide.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong, but I would hope others would think a bit harder about what they think they saw before berating Phil Bentham. I believe the ball missed by by a comfortable enough distance and Phil Bentham was stood in a perfect spot to see it. He is not stupid (banter aside) he would have known the connotations by going up to the video ref, if he was not 100% he would have used that, enormous pressure off his shoulders, but he also knows the video could give false impressions, so he must have been 100% confident.

And now Brough kicking out and punching.

Brough should get 2-3 for that. Kicked then punched, no idea why Whiting was binned.

If brough is deemed to have deliberately kicked whiting (which I believe he did) and makes full, aggressive contact (more debatable, the contact was certainly there, but i don't know, it's hard to argue it's not aggressive but it's not a proper kick) then he's facing the same grading as Ferres did (E-F) - I'd expect B-D (light contact, more likely C-D given the striking after and it was pretty clear cut) even if he's not called out for that, the fouls and abusive language after the Ellis rip should see him up before the beak.

Grix on a striking charge - if it's considered sustained (which given multiple were thrown (6 according to vt) seems likely) carries C-D

Crabtree on a dangerous throw - Cumberland throws aren't graded (merely given A-F) they're not particularly dangerous or fashionable any more, but still outlawed (was a great judo throw though! There was definite use of the leg and sweep through to take talona(sp) off balance for me) and I'd say A-B

Probably a few more incidents, as it was a very scrappy game, and Huddersfield were amazingly ill disciplined.

These are the last things you need going into Easter! Wonder if it's more biased rfl out to knock them down ...

I think the reactions of both Anderson and the Huddersfield club to the drop goal fiasco on Sunday have not served the team well at all. They all felt hard done to and got all steamed up about the ref's decision. All that has served to do is get certain members of the team irate, causing serious ill discipline and any hope of a win last night to fly away over the Humber bridge. I thought it was a shame to see the team which performed so well last season morph into what was on TV last night. That transformation appears to have been led by Danny Brough.

Bad ill-tempered play is just as infectious as good play is in a team’s performance as we all know, and the fact is that despite all Danny Brough’s abilities his rants and dummy spiting IMO will always stop him from being the complete package.