Mick, you meant it LAST time...

Do you really think you can stick to it this time? Given you are bound to get intense provocation from the officials at the remaining three matches...

I lose my rag at the officials from time to time, but I can't imagine many jobs I'd like to do less? With a short career and pay far less than some of the big blokes you have to control, eyes needed in every corner of your head and instant recall and a photographic memory - as well as the ability to watch half a dozen different things at once? Would you fancy it? Yet someone has to do it.

(Klein was a different story...)

I've been out in the middle myself and know it's hard but the likes of Silverwood and Child just don't themselves do they when they take charge of our games.

Why is it the same names that we have problems with?

Maybe that's what the officials say too...?

Well IMO the move to full time refs has not resulted in the improvement in performance that justifies the cost. Putting aside the atrocious decisions the Bulls have faced, we see poor decision making week in/week out - and I don't mean just little errors. Also, I'd like to see an end to the video ref as I think it adds little and has proven almost as error prone as the on-the-spot decisions it replaces.

So, Mr Cummings, refs should go back to being part-time (then it'd be a lot easier to get rid of crap ones for a start). And we should all accept that the ref in the middle will make errors - providing us with endless hours of 'fun' arguing about them in various fora

nothing to see here

Good man Mick.

Out of order Mick I don't like the guy but he has not being found guilty so believing reports in the newspaper is a tad gullible.

What's wrong with it?

I've got the Guardian in front of me and it says Ganson was intoxicated and that he's been arrested.

Public Domain?

Ok I'll delete it.

Thackley...you'd better delete the quote now? Thanks mate. - Oh, looks like you already did.

No worries I just thought that once this was in the public domain as Matt always tells me we can then post about it, but I guess not.

I agree he should not have been out at 2 a.m. on the lash and working next day on a very important game. The referees are professional are they?

The fact that he was arrested is. The speculation about what happened to cause that arrest is [isub judice[/i.

O.K. he may not have being drinking but 2 O'clock with the Challenge Cup semi final next day. One can only speculate what time he'd have got home if he didn't go to the Bridewell.

If that was any of our players they wouldn't play so the question I want to know asap from Cummings is how long as he been allowing his officials to drink before the games and still go out there be it the referee or video referee and do there job?

This doesn't come across as very professional does it, maybe we found the missing link as why they have off days so many times, although God help Child if he doesn't have his passport handy

My comment was aimed at Mick, Thacks, not you! What you said was spot on.

What is even more "unprofessional" is the BBC reading out some pish poor statement from the RFL regarding it, live on air. It had zero relevance, was poor journalism and clumsy at best.

Poor form all round.

A BBC station reading out a press statement, live? Shocking.

Whatever next?

It shouldn't have been issued by the RFL in the first place.

I tend to agree. All they had to say - if anything - was that Ganson would not now be the VR due to changed circumstances.

Yup "an injury" to said referee is simplistically explained and without much further digging. Fair bit of naivety on the RFL's part given that refs are helped in contempt by many fans anyway. Leading with the chin doesn't even cover it.

But by that point it was already in the public domain. Would it not make them look stupid reading out that he had an "injury" when everyone already knew why he was not doing it?

No need to say "injury" - just "circumstances"?

Message board "domain" which is as spurious as it gets.

Whatever their final published comment, it didn't need to contain facts regarding the actual circumstances. Damn sure the Premier League wouldn't do it. The FA maybe, but then theyre =#FF0000<EDIT : Whilst I may agree with the sentiment GB, the word you'd used here isn't acceptable on RLfans.com - BP> as well.

The papers were full of it. They didn't just say circumstances.