Are we still going to have this chump dumped on us every week in the Championship?

Can anyone put the record straight on the ball not going the 10m??

Yes it went past but landed 5m from the half way line! Not sure wind is in the rule book?

I don't really see the confusion, the ball just has to travel 10 metres. When the ball is kicked short and knocked backwards it hasn't landed either. As long as nobody touches the ball before it goes 10m then there is no problem.

The mistakes he made were crucial as 4 tries were scored following either a poor decision or a wrong decision, or even no decision at all. His refereeing was not up to scratch.
The 10 metre kick ended up at 5 metres due to the wind factor, however the Hull player who took the ball cleanly was only on 5 metres from the kick off, not sure what the ruling is, but to my mind it was a penalty to the Bulls because the ball or the player did not finish over the 10 mtr line. Simple logic really, because the Ball had been kicked high and no one could say how far it travelled in the air?

There is a d!ckhead called Jake the peg. It's a Hull fan. It knows everything (or thinks it does). It'll be along soon to explain the rules. When it has stopped sulking of course.

The ball only has to travel past the 10m mark, it did this up in the air before being blown back - play on correct decision it's not that hard to grasp surely

Or, to be completely accurate, every person in the ground who is not registered blind could 100% definitely say the ball went more than 10 before it was blown back

What I found difficult was in normal circumstances the players contesting the kickoff, would have been near or over the 10 to ensure they could defend the kick. The Hull player did not have to reverse to take the ball! Obviously memory of an incident sometimes lets me and all the other registered blind people down! However it looked like a ploy, and if we had encroached into the 10, would Robert H, have penalised us for offside??? And in windy conditions could not a side do this every time they kicked off, to gain such an advantage? (a hair is split, now)

Another bone of contention was the "Free" play that saw us knock on and Hull take up the advantage, they then gave a forward pass that if not seen by the Ref. may have resulted in a try. Obviously RH followed the rules and gave a scrum for the first offence. However if a try had have been scored because the FP was missed, that would have been a mockery of that rule and what's more since when is a side allowed to commit a rule breaking play, and then the non offenders be penalised by losing possession because they committed the first error prior to the advantage being given to the opposition?

So not sure of the free play ruling, the coaches are obviously teaching players how to exploit it now, by breaking the rules, at the time I personally had no doubt that the FP was deliberate, (technically offside) which could have resulted in a try. Of course the 10 metre fiasco with wind factor resulted in a try, and the crowd showed their dissent vocally. Only about a couple of thousand of the blind portion of our supporters, of course???
Another point FA do we have to pay extra for the Labrador's??

Not sure in the kick off but I doubt you could get it that wrong if the ruling isn't that it has to travel 10m in the air only so I'm not bothered about that.

It's some of the other calls or calls he doesn't give. He missed one high shot in Adam O'Brien when he wasn't even watching play.

He was even levelling up at the end of the first half by pinging Hull every two seconds.

It's every other match we get him too.

If we get him for the Widnes match they should accidentally on purpose flood the refs changing room so they have to get changed in the pavilion and walk through the crowds.

It's not right we get him so often. The appointment of referees need to be more transparent and logical - IE if there are 8 refs - we should get an equal proportion of appointments spread over the eight?

What particularly annoys me about Hicks (for both sides) - he often actually misses incidents or he is not watching the play - and when he is in doubt - its a penalty against the defending team. He gave pens yesterday for incidents he was clearly not looking at - drives me round the twist

Incidentally, the rule about the wind also applies to passing the ball, so long as the ball is initially passed backwards it is OK, many of those shouts of "forward", were therefore also totally wrong.

If I have any real complaint against Hicks it was his application, or [inon[/i application, of the offside law. He allowed both sides to encroach far too much at the ptb for my liking.

Hicks has refereed Bradford 9 times this season in 24 SL games. That is more than any referee has taken control of any team, next is Thaler and Widnes (7 times).

There were a few odd looking decisions yesterday but nothing that I thought was that bad. The only annoyance was the non policing of the 10m rule at the PTB and the slowness of the PTB for both sides. It made for a very slow game at times with both teams messing about deliberately. I know it’s hard for a ref to simultaneously keep an eye on the PTB and the offside but just about every PTB had someone offside.

The sooner we adopt the dual ref system they have in the NRL the better. Their PTB is much cleaner leading to quicker games and less cynical play in that area. I don’t know if we have enough refs but if not then there should be a recruitment drive and some money put in to develop and support them so they can do the job better.

His appreciation of the rules of the game are inconsistent at best but the performance of the touch judges was even worse. I don't understand what their roles are currently?hull's last try should have been chalked off due to sa's obvious infringement against the defending Adam o'brien. To change and maintain a running line whilst putting yr shoulder against the defender is against the rules and how the touch judge was unaware when he was stood right beside them is embarrassing for our game. Hicks control of the ten metre line is pitiful, he was constantly gesturing for both teams line to come back the full ten with both teams ignoring him to very little consequence. He needs to man up and make a call for repeated infringements, for the repeated failure of the team not making the defensive ten every tackle he should penalise twice then look at putting someone in the sin bin, potentially the captain, will make teams understand the impact of being consistently offside.

This has to be some sort of record? Get the changing rooms flooded Jimmy

So, all the ball has to do is achieve 10 metres forward travel in the field of play. It doesn't have to land. And if it did have to land then it would be illegal to catch a kickoff (you'd have to wait for it to land first) and that would be really stupid.

Second, a defender can't deliberately touch it before it has travelled the 10, or that's a pen. too.

The refs in the Championship are way worse than him - Stokes , Turley etc and Jamie Bloem refs at the Championship level he has officiated Fax Games....

Yeh, every official in the country is unmitigated shiit, and you're the expert, OK we get it.

Speaking to fans at games I believe most fans actually do appreciate that overall the officials do a very difficult job pretty well, but it is certainly true that these sort of internet forums attract a constant stream of hyperbolic whingers. It's the modern day equivalent of the radio phone in, they always just attract loud-mouthed pontificating spittle-dribblers and ignorasnt morons who would abuse an official whatever he did.

Rational discussion and criticism of specific instances and decisions is fine, and i am not trying to suggest refs aren't up for discussion, quite the contrary, everything is, but what I query is the huge disproportion in the heads of some who simply obsess about the officiating in games, and probably get so wound up about it, they don't actually wacth much of the game itself at all, as they're too busy raising their blood pressure to near explosion point, griping at what they see as the inevitable procession of ref howlers, and all 9of course) against their team.

On forums for a few leaping in to slather the ref is all they can't wait to do. Do they watch the whole game like that? Don't they actually want to talk about the play, their team, how it performed, what they did?

But it is really ridiculous to (for example) accuse, say, Silverwood or indeed young Hicks of being a rubbish ref. The guys have reached the top level, refereed thousands of hours to get there, and have the respect of most fans and players. To say a ref made a mistake, or didn't allegedly police the 10 properly is one thing. To say he is crap is just matical nonsense.

As for lower league refs - like in any job where there are progressively harder jobs, how else do you suggest refs cut their teeth - on a fscking Playstation?

TBF FA Faxfan doesn't claim to be an expert. I've a few friends that follow teams in the Championship and Championship 1 who say that officials at those levels do get more things wrong than at SL level. This wasn't expressed in any kind of rant or anything, just a sober opionion based on watching rugby at different levels.

We both know it's a difficult, thankless task.

I was replying to Faxfan but the main diatribe isn't specifically aimed at him, but at the perennial ref-bashers and baiters that start endless threads immediately after pretty much every match.

It seems reasonable that less experienced refs would get more things wrong than more experienced refs, but one thing I would bet a LOT of money is that, in any given game, if it was properly recorded and analysed, the majority of decisions that any given ref critic complained about would end up having in fact been correct.

Don't get me wrong, I love a shout at the ref, and the linesman on the stand side, as much as the next man, it's part of the game experience isn't it, but the number of times on the video afterwards I've had to concede the ref was right, or arguably right, far exceeds the times he was palpably wrong.

But don't get me started on video refs ...

What gets me about Hicks is that all he does at PTB is wave his arms for defending team to get onside but NEVER looks to check that they have done so.After a couple of PTB's liberties begin to be taken. But so what, guess it doesnt really matter. Does it.

I think that's pretty general, with most refs, at the PTB.

In fact, it was taken to a new low [height? at Cas on Sunday when Mr Stokes didn't bother blowing offside against Luke Dorn when, at a Bulls PTB, nine metres out, he walked in front of the referee. I don't mean he was 'in front' in the general context [most defenders were that, but he actually wandered, directly in front, in the direct, front-on eyeline of the referee. Dorn's position was such as to obscure the view of any possible knock on by us, from the referee - and he still didn't blow.

Seeing Dorn there [he was within ten, so definitely interfering, play went the other way, when we really ought to have run at him and forced the issue. Of course, a couple of PTBs later, a Cas one, he blew us offside and Clark scored his long distance try...the difference between being switched on or not, I guess.

Incidentally, I fully accept that the Bulls take the usual liberties with this - as do all clubs - but I've never seen anything so blatant before. This was just thumbing the nose and I'm still amazed he got away with it.

So allegedly Hicks "never" checks whether a team is offside at any PTB.

You see, it's just this sort of OTT hyperbolic nonsense that irritates me. if this were anything even close to the truth, do you seriously suggest he would have a job as a professional referee?

I too have seen cases often where many of a team are offside but offside is not blown. That would be back to the perennial argument as to whether to either penalise like a maniac until they "get the lesson" or let the game flow unless the offside gains the team an advantage etc.

Clearly, currently one standing order to the refs is to above all let the game flow, as the number of penalties, especially in critical games, is usually quite low. On balance I prefer it the way it is.

My irritation with the PTB is the default setting of the refs to penalise the defending side.

Several times during a game, the attacking player takes a couple of steps forwards off the mark, the defending player tries to hold his ground at the mark. This then generates "messing around at the PTB". The ref (majority of the time) will penalise the defender rather than the player who has walked off the mark and caused the problem in the first place. Good gamesmanship I suppose, seeing the opportunity for either 1) a fast PTB or 2) a penalty. No downside for the attacking team.

I laugh at scrums though when a team needs a breather and they "forget" that 6 men go in the scrum and the ref has to remind them...