I watched the game from my armchair and he was poor.

I don't think you'd have a clue if you watched it at the game, watched a recording and then had a team of referees to explain everything to you.

I think Alibert got two of these decisions wrong tonight. The first one was in our favour. The Kiwi full back jumped in the air to claim the ball, an England player clipped his legs and the full back lost the ball when going down. The contact with the Kiwi players legs should have resulted in a Kiwi pen but Alibert played on (?) with England getting the ball back.

The other one was the tackle in the air on our winger. Defenders are allowed to tackle attackers in the air, but Alibert needs to know that the defender is only allowed to tackle when the attacker actually has the ball. The Kiwi defender tackled him well before the ball was close. Alibert gave that as a knock on from England.

[iMid-air tackle 1. (b) It is illegal to tackle an opposing player attempting to
field a kick whilst the player is in mid-air. The catcher must have returned to the ground before being tackled.[/i

These were the rules in 2004 - I don't think they've been altered since then.

IIRC it was the TJ who flagged it.

The Aussie tithead wouldn't even have given the pen left to his own devices yet it was a nailed-on penalty try.

I was at the game and he was shocking for both sides, as for Tomkins being anonymous I feel he has a good game... His intensity in defence and his spark in attack was a pleasure to watch. Shame he plays for Wigan and not us.

My understanding is that only applies to defensive playerss. If you put a bomb in the air to a full back or winger then you've got to allow him to land before making contact.

I don't think that protection is offered to attacking players though. The attacking team are choosing to put the ball in the air, the attacking player is choosing to jump into the air to collect the ball. You don't get the protection, and obvious advantage, of being allowed to land when your the team who has chosen that attacking strategy.

The Senior incident at that time should've been given as a penalty try. But after that the rules were changed and it was clarified that attackers could be tackled in those situations but not defenders.

I might be wrong though. It has happened a couple of times before in my life.

That used to be a rule in the NRL but they got rid of it as well because even they realised it was a stupid, unfair and dangerous rule. You cannot tackle any player in the air, you have to wait for at least 1 foot to hit the ground again. A tackle is also complete if a player leaves the ground during a tackle.

Does it say that in the rules?

My recollection is that the rule was introduced to protect players who were vulnerable while airborne. That would apply equally to attackers or defenders.

IIRC the ARL wanted to use the NRL's two referees system in this Four Nations series, which would not only have helped refs from all countries (i.e. Hayne, Ganson, Williamson and Alibert) keep pace with the game, but make fewer mistakes, keep a more accurate 10 gap and police the ruck more accurately. However the RFL vetoed it.

Look if the NRL wants to keep changing things every week then that's their problem, but it's a local rule only, not in the international rules.

Sorry, but you don't own Rugby League.

A defending player can contest for the ball in the air. He can't tackle the attacker though until he's landed.

4 pages of having a go at the match officials and their standards!

So they got things wrong. Are not "international" standard.

Start also applying that to the players as well for consistancy.

So the player tackling the player in the air was NOT trying to break the rules?

So the people stripping the ball were NOT breaking the rules.

The players forcing elbows into faces were NOT breaking the rules and yet all this is the MATCH OFFICIALS FAULT



















Get a grip people.

If the players and coaching followed the rules there would be no need for match officials.

Seeing that will NEVER happen they are needed, and if you accept that players , coaches get it wrong then accept that match officials do as well.

The NRL tried the Two referees policy for good reasons, allow refereeing to be more accurate, consistent, to minimise the kind of criticism that this thread has generated.

and they and the players STILL get it wrong and thats with the awful videoref system at all games!!!!!!

Oh the irony!

If I were in Stuart Cummings place I would be negotiating with him now!

Agree 100%. Do you think the RFL will reaslise or do you think they'll stick with him and allow him to make a mockery of domestic games next year too?

Let's start a petition, Halibut out Kiwi in!!

How far away is Ian Smith from retirement?

He was shocking last night but come on, everybody has one.
I was shouting at the telly at how poor he was in policing the PTB but still, he'll improve in time. That was probably too big a stage for him at this moment in time.

Waht are your thoughts on teh ref? Whilst I agree with neutral refs and good to see SL bringing French Refs through ( I hope to see NZ ones in teh NRL one day) I thought at times he was very pedantic with the holding down and yet was quite generous with the offsides and markers not square. A couple of gaffs but overall I thought he did ok. 6/10 on the scoresheet.

I felt that he got a couple of things clearly wrong ie the tackle in air they missed. But with the forward passes it's nearly always the touchies that give them via the comms. So I can't blame him for any of that.

I do notice that the the English and French refs seem to allow the tackle to go on longer than perhaps the NRL where they'd call "held" earlier. I actually don't think that's a bad thing though as it can get called far too early here when there is still a lot of momentum.

Whilst he did miss the tackle in the air, again that should have been the touchies call. he was only a few metres away and had a clear unobstructed view. I do wonder exactly what touchies are watching sometimes!

They say a lot more than people give them credit for. We get DVDs of our games with all the comms on and they are responsible for about 80+% of the offsides given in a game. The ref just blows the whistle.