Was at the game last night and sat virtually parallel with that incident. It was marginal but you cannot fault the refs positioning for it, he had the best view of anyone. That nothing has really been made of the Dan Marino pass for the first Leeds try shows that some cannot accept that these things even themselves up. In this case it was in the same game.

Regarding Childs, yes his blows his whistle too much and there were a couple of odd ones, but it was both ways.

I couldn't see why tickles wasn't given on BOD.

Ha thanks for that

I think everyone wants a free flowing game but it's the not refs fault if the players are offside or attempting to gouge someones eyes out or head high tackles.

Enthralling maybe but as a professional RL game I still say it was pants and both teams, especially Leeds are capable of far better. The error rate was off the scale at times in both attack and defence.

Like I said on the Leeds board, have to disagree. I think Jon does a great job, and I don't see why you can't see the difference between "divided" (which can be any proportion) and "split down the middle" (which is an even division).

And whilst I disagree with his comment about the Tickle no try, he's trying to be positive and back the ref.

Other than those two, what else has he said to grind your gears? Must be more than two things surely?!

Off the scale? Really?

But, of course, if the Winos had won there would have been no comment.

Not wishing to offend or anything, but had you been drinking heavily prior to the game?

Don't support Leeds and not having a go at either team in particular, just making a general comment as a neutral.The game was entertaining and I suppose that's the point but the standard was generally poop.

Only for medicinal purposes.

Can’t see any other threads about last night’s game on here so I will add to this one

Good game, really enjoyed it and Hull FC are starting to become an 80 minute team

Some very good performances and in particular from some young English centre and wing partnerships... Briscoe being the clear stand out of course and his second try couldn’t have been scored by many players in Super League, the combination of strength and speed he has is very impressive

Pity the thread is about the ref and all the negatives from last night and not the game itself but I guess you get used to that when you’re a Rugby League fan

He doesn't SAY anything, he shouts continually, I suppose that's what grates the most. But I suggest you go back through the derby and the London games, he's certainly got little to no good things to say about us.

Because he dropped the ball.

We hardly played amazingly against London to be fair.

I don't judge his performance on what he has to say about us. I judge it on how good his analysis of the play is, and it's very good. Highlights the weakness in the defensive line early in the piece, says where they should have been, and what the attack did well to spot and take advantage of it. And he picks out the subtle but relevant things as well, something that Cullen tried to do but failed miserably at (timing the play the balls and trying to show a significant difference when there wasn't really). And he doesn't get into bickering about the ref/the players/the RFL. He's very level headed IMO.

Where on that video replay can you conclusively say he dropped the ball?

Having been at the game, seen the tv replays there, and subsequently at home, there is not evidence to suggest that's is the case. There is no clear view of Tickle touching down. There is clear evidence of the ball being grounded without any sort of bounce or wobble suggesting a drop.

HTH

Tickle had hold of the ball as we was going to ground and then before he got to ground, he had lost hold of it. Of that much there is no doubt.

He did not touch the ball down with either hand. Because neither hand was any longer in contact with it. The non-technical term for this is "he dropped it".

The ball may well never have left contact with Tickle's chest, but you can only legally score a try with your chest by dropping on a loose ball which is in play. Not one that you yourself dropped which becomes a knock on as soon as the ball hits the ground.

The first Leeds try was a forward pass but that was the linesman's call not the ref. Most of the top teams (which regularly shift the ball out wide, to prolific wingers) score tries like that, unchallenged, week in week out, where invariably not only the last pass, but the previous pass to the centre are both forward. Most of them are let go, so it's unsurprising that this one was too. But a mistake.

The short forward pass WAS marginally forward. Only very marginally, but technically a correct call. It would have irritated the hell out of me if I'd been a Leeds fan simply as those short balls are almost never given as forward, even when obviously so, but the fact that short forward passes ("line balls"icon_wink.gif to players coming on your shoulder are rarely called doesn't make it a wrong decision, A highly unusual one to actually give, but correct.

Child had a pretty good game, apart from not sending Webb off. I'd sin-bin him every 5 minutes.

Where the ball drops to the floor without any hands on it. That's why it wasn't given. simple really.

Simple if it's clear that that happened. I disagree, as do many others. I had a Saints fan text me at the time asking how the hell they disallowed that.

I had a Warrington supporter text me that he thought the decision was spot on.

Why would anyone want to communicate with you.

You seem fairly keen, that's 2 messages you've sent me in the last 10 minutes or so, I guess we are friends now. Can I add you to my Christmas card list?

Indeed you can. Can you make sure its not made from stiff card as I would like to wipe my a*se on it.

The point I'm making is that it's not just Hull fans that think that.

And why would a Warrington fan text you during a Hull vs Leeds game?

None of this is apparent from any of the angles shown by Sky - not even the super-duper close-up they showed later. I'm therefore curious as to what evidence you have used to come to these conclusions.

Even if you accepted the fact that Tickle lost the ball at some point - and as mentioned that's far from clear - you would have to be certain that it wasn't knocked from his hand by the tackler and/or that he didn't regain contact before it hit the ground. Once again, none of this can be ascertained with any certainty from the footage.

In other words, this incident is pretty much what the BOD rule was made for. The VR has to be [icertain[/i that no try was scored in order to rule it out. If there is any doubt whatsoever it should be allowed.