Speaking of Hicks he had another dire game this time as a touchie yesterday. One of his decisions don't disadvnatged either team but it could have done. Bradford kicked into Leeds corner and the ball clearly bounced on the line then bounced back in field. Hall stopped, Bradford stopped, but for some reason Hicks played on. Thankfully Leeds got tackled in the corner and no team and any real advantage, but it could of been a costly error to leeds if Bradford had have scored.

Then another decison, Bradford player was been tackled right in front of Hicks, the tackle was completed then suddenly the ball shot out and went about 5 meteres from the tackle and somehow Hicks said Bradford lost the ball when he was standing right in front of it. He has been worse than Childs this year has Hicks.

Back in 2011, Fax seemed to get Hicks in the middle for almost every game at the business end of the season. What a relief it was when he was promoted to the Super League list, you are welcome to him.

Hopefully Stokes will be on his way up soon - please!

The only way that would matter is if the same player who knocked it forward was to regather it. Millard knocked - not passed, knocked - the ball towards the Saints line. It touched another player before he could regather it. Textbook knock on.

Ian Smith should not be allowed within a mile of a rugby match. He is of no use whatsoever and the number of times his poor decisions have cost teams matches is unbelievable. Its time Cummings started earning his wages and sorted these individuals out.

Historically, Ian smith is THE worst referee Saints have had in superleague and we have lost many a game with him as pitch or video referee. Seem to remember Ian Millward and Daniel Anderson putting in official complaints, with just a slap wrist from Cummings.
So I think it probably is a bit of a suprise that we have the rub of the green, benefit of the doubt, bias towards Saints from him. Our next game where is involved we might be not as lucky, this season it makes you think can we do without a VR to see if the game gets a more balanced outcome.

I've listened to Smith as video ref on Premier Sports and after hearing how he arrives at his decisions, so far me plus all the various pundits on Premier (such as Nobby, who previously wasn't a fan), have agreed with every decision he has made, bar just one. So far.

That'll be the disallowed Cats try last night then.

Quote ="Fax Bluenose"For your viewing displeasure! www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5bcu-pi ... e=youtu.be'" Aussie refs (plural) made a mistake and ours got it spot on.

Quote ="Fax Bluenose"For your viewing displeasure! www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5bcu-pi ... e=youtu.be'" Aussie refs (plural) made a mistake and ours got it spot on.

Quote ="Fax Bluenose"For your viewing displeasure! www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5bcu-pi ... e=youtu.be'" Watched that twice and still cant believe it.

Quote ="Fax Bluenose"For your viewing displeasure! www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5bcu-pi ... e=youtu.be'" Watched that twice and still cant believe it.

Quote ="Leon Ashton"Inglis has just got away with a challenge worse than Puletuas'" Got away being the operative word! www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5bcu-pi ... e=youtu.be That is a ing disgrace. If anyone thinks that is tackling they may as well go and watch heads outside clubs at 2am. Intentional attack to the head on a virtually defenseless player whereas Puletuas was a mistimed hit. Akin to a team mate holding someones hands behind their backs while someone throws punches at will at their head.

Quote ="Leon Ashton"Inglis has just got away with a challenge worse than Puletuas'" Got away being the operative word! www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5bcu-pi ... e=youtu.be That is a ing disgrace. If anyone thinks that is tackling they may as well go and watch heads outside clubs at 2am. Intentional attack to the head on a virtually defenseless player whereas Puletuas was a mistimed hit. Akin to a team mate holding someones hands behind their backs while someone throws punches at will at their head.

Quote ="Redchemic"Got away being the operative word! www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5bcu-pi ... e=youtu.be That is a loving disgrace. If anyone thinks that is tackling they may as well go and watch heads outside clubs at 2am. Intentional attack to the head on a virtually defenseless player whereas [i[uPuletuas was a mistimed hit[/u[/i. Akin to a team mate holding someones hands behind their backs while someone throws punches at will at their head.'" It may well have been, but it was worse than Moa's against the Cats and he was banned. For the sake of consistency Puletua needs to be banned as well.

Quote ="Redchemic"Got away being the operative word! www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5bcu-pi ... e=youtu.be That is a loving disgrace. If anyone thinks that is tackling they may as well go and watch heads outside clubs at 2am. Intentional attack to the head on a virtually defenseless player whereas [i[uPuletuas was a mistimed hit[/u[/i. Akin to a team mate holding someones hands behind their backs while someone throws punches at will at their head.'" It may well have been, but it was worse than Moa's against the Cats and he was banned. For the sake of consistency Puletua needs to be banned as well.

I can see were your coming from BUT it was border line and in no way was it definitely knocked towards the Saints line and by no means was it knocked back towards the Dragons line. If the VR can not rule on a forward pass because of camera angles then surely he cant rule on that. As from one angle it looked it went towards the Sts line and the other to the Dragons. It didn't hit the floor so that can not be used as a marker and Pryce was about three yards behind the play and ran forward to gather it. All in all inclonclusive benefit of doubt.

I think Puleutua can count himself unlucky. A couple of years ago, Ryan Bailey cleaned up Fa'asavalu in a similar fashion and commentator Paul Cullen defended him to the hilt. You don't penalise a high shot if the player ducks into it and, imo, if you run face first into a prop forward's brace shoulder you're asking for trouble.
I feel they should make a desicion to either outlaw the shoulder charge all together, a la Rugby union or realise that (in Terry O'C's words) its not tiddlywinks.

Regarding the dissallowed try from the kick - watching it I feel there is some argument that the catalan jumper made contact with the saints palyer very early and that the jump which followed was more of a token to fool the officials. It was a tough call, but not one completely bereft of merit.

As for the dissalowed try following the knocked pass. You can argue about the VR being allowed to rule on forward passes etc, but that wasn't a try in a million years.

Saints have had MANY bad experiences of Ian Smith as VR, so you'll not find many of us losing sleep when one goes our way.

Inglis doesn't really keep his elbow down very well, but the first contact this has is with the Dragons' player's arm chest, but then his shoulder whacks him in the face. Inglis's height is probably the main reason that the execution has ended up like this (puletua is also very tall).
In this case, the dragons' player was very upright, so there can be no argument that he in any way ducked into it in the way Faasavalu did against Bailey.


I think we all need calrification from the authroities about exactly how these situations are to be reffed and what responsibility lies with who.