So last night it was Bentham's turn, and VReffing gets no better.

Dodgy decision 1 - when is a "lost ball" a try, and when is it not a try? last week Gardner plainly loses contact with the ball but a try is given. This week the player so very clearly keeps contact with the ball and touches it down - yet no try is given.

Dodgy decision 2 - when is a knock on not a knock on? A while back, Semi Tadulala scooped a ball directly back over his head, behind him, yet it was given as a knock on on the spurious grounds that it still had some forward momentum. yet last night a ball is so plainly knocked literally yards forward, but the VR (according to Eddie) ruled it went backwards.

The system, or the people tasked to run it, seems beyond salvage. There is no point to this - if we can't find anyone competent to view a screen, we should scrap it.

There's nothing wrong with the system of video refereeing. It's the individual who has made the decision that's wrong. Those two decisions last night have to rank as two of the worst that I've ever seen. You can forgive close calls, howver neither of those two Harlequins RL decisions were that. Both were clear cut calls.

I think Bentham realised that he made a mistake giving the first try and scrubbed off the second to make amends as they were both blatent

Nah I think the evener was not going to the screen for Bailys try.

Until ALL the games have the same type of coverage the VR should be got rid of!

I feel the biggest problem is that the replays are slowed down so much, freeze framed, run forwards then backwards again, shown from another angle, then the first angle again, practically every decision that gets referred ends up looking dubious.

For the disallowed Sharp try yesterday the touch judge was about five yards away and was practically obscuring the camera's view from one angle - if he can't be trusted to call that he might as well not be there. On another decision that was referred the in goal judge was right on the spot and would have had an unobstructed view. If we must have the referral system I feel all replays should be shown at real speed and if they're doubtful the try is given. The first Quins try yesterday was unbelievable - Dorn(?) clearly touched the ball forward before a defender knocked it right back into the in goal area for Randall to score.

On a slightly different topic, I think the French ref would have got the decision right if he hadn't referred them. I thought he had a very very good game, and he looks to be one of the better refs around at the moment.

I'd agree with that assertion.

There are a few new refs knocking about in SL and they seem to mostly be doing a better job than the likes of Ganson, Klein et al.

Apart from missing Bailey's blatant double movement you mean?

I thought Sky were saying it was Ben Thaler not Bentham?

Dorn knocked on. It just doesn't get any clearer than that. An unfathomable and inexcusable call from the video ref.

Sharpe touched down with his little finger and it was enough.

Bailey's appeared a double movement and his action in promoting the ball would suggest he did too. Poor refereeing by Alibert not referring it but perhaps he had lost confidence in the man upstairs by this point.

This is exactly my point.

I reckon it's now clear that, however good and knowledgable a referee you may be on the field, the RFL hasn't catered for the possibility that a ref may be a technologcal halfwit, or a person whose brain just isn't wired to look at a 2D image and be able to work out 3D angles properly.

I often wonder about this when the VR is asked to check if someone was onside. Once the frame freezes, you have to make allowance for parallax as the lines on the pitch diverge towards the camera, but usually, to me, it's immediately blindingly obvious. Yet some of these guys seem to take an age, and start looking from all sorts of angles and repeat several times, and this might just be because their brains just aren't able to do the maths.

At least, that sort of theory could explain the "no knock on" ruling. How you either explain the no-try ruling - or more to the point, try to reconcile it with other calls made in similar circumstances, or the rules, is a bigger problem.

didn't think we had in goal judges in televised games.

The first Leeds try tonight is another shot in the arm for the anti VR brigade.

Never a try in a million years. Ganson got it completely wrong, therefore human error was to blame and not the technology. If only we had someone who knew what they were doing behind the big red button.

You're right. It must have been the ref then! There was definitely an official in a bright orange kit standing a couple of yards away! At least he was in a great position even if he wasn't decisive enough to take a decision!

I'd take Alibert ahead of most refs on yesterday's performance, but I thought he was too lenient with lying on at the tackle. Otherwise fair and consistent.

Was it really that obvious to see in the pace of the game?

I didnt think it was obvious till we saw Alibetrs view!