Quote ="Boss Hog"Another incident missed by Kendall in the 1st half of the game. Pi$$ poor, when he was so quick to sinbin Currie. https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... nary-news/'" I shouted as soon as i seen this. Nothing done. Gale was even limping after it......poor performance again from Kendall.

Quote ="Boss Hog"Another incident missed by Kendall in the 1st half of the game. Pi$$ poor, when he was so quick to sinbin Currie. https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... nary-news/'" I shouted as soon as i seen this. Nothing done. Gale was even limping after it......poor performance again from Kendall.

Quote ="jools"I'm really not sure what you expect a referee to do. If this was a game without cameras no one would bat an eyelid right there if the ref gave a try. It happens ALL the time in hundreds of games up and down the country. He has to make a call. At least he made one and didn't bottle it. Likely he gave the call he would have given without the benefit of the cameras. benefit of doubt to the attacking side perhaps, did he see something the cameras didn't. (they have limited angles) So without the cameras there nothing would be any different! The ball has to touch just one blade of grass - we cannot say it does we cannot say it does not with the camera angles- BUT who's to say that the ref didn't get a view not seen by the cameras? I keep hearing they should go upstairs without a decision - we had that remember and that caused even more controversy. Let the ref make a decision like he does in every game. if you think you can do better stop moaning about it and click this link! https://www.rugby-league.com/get-involv ... official--'" You’re right, no camera and it’s a try, the issue is, there was cameras, and there is scrutinising as part of the entertainment, and because of that, there is a duty to the viewer to get the decision correct. There was enough evidence for the pitch ref to have reviewed his original decision as with the Aus ruling, and called it differently, something currently a SL VR cannot do.

Quote ="jools"I'm really not sure what you expect a referee to do. If this was a game without cameras no one would bat an eyelid right there if the ref gave a try. It happens ALL the time in hundreds of games up and down the country. He has to make a call. At least he made one and didn't bottle it. Likely he gave the call he would have given without the benefit of the cameras. benefit of doubt to the attacking side perhaps, did he see something the cameras didn't. (they have limited angles) So without the cameras there nothing would be any different! The ball has to touch just one blade of grass - we cannot say it does we cannot say it does not with the camera angles- BUT who's to say that the ref didn't get a view not seen by the cameras? I keep hearing they should go upstairs without a decision - we had that remember and that caused even more controversy. Let the ref make a decision like he does in every game. if you think you can do better stop moaning about it and click this link! https://www.rugby-league.com/get-involv ... official--'" You’re right, no camera and it’s a try, the issue is, there was cameras, and there is scrutinising as part of the entertainment, and because of that, there is a duty to the viewer to get the decision correct. There was enough evidence for the pitch ref to have reviewed his original decision as with the Aus ruling, and called it differently, something currently a SL VR cannot do.

He sent it up to the VR based on a guess, he didn't have a scooby doo whether that ball was down or not but he certainly wasn't going to send it up as no try with 9000 Hull fans between him and the motorway.

The villain of the piece is the six again rule. Totally subjective, wide open to abuse (hence the furore around acting sneaking into the game), inconsistently applied and diminishes the spectacle. Bin it off.

Spot on it's THE most inconsistently policed law ever IMO same thing happened against Salford for a couple of their scores. I know I've P&B specs but these recent decisions, administered so marginally, are deciding games it's so open to abuse on every level. .

This is all a farce. Get rid of video calls she just let the referee make the calls again. Game needs to flow better and mistakes are still made all the time. Adds nothing to the spectacle…

not quite, he sent it up to the VR on the balance of probability - like refs do every single game without the benefit of the cameras there. I thought the idea was they were supposed to award the try based on what they would have given if the cameras weren't present. If the cameras weren't present I would hazard there would not have been a debate about it at all and the decision would have been accepted without question.
I repeat, we still cannot see what the ref saw at the time even with the multiple camera angles. Perhaps what we really need is a "ref cam" rather than multiple camera angles!

I've seen this again a few times now and I don't see how the try couldnt have been awarded really on balance of probability kendall has to think it very likely touched a blade of grass. Under old rules benefit of doubt to the attack awards the try as well. It looked held up to me and camera angles suggested held up but the ball goes missing and could very well have been grounded.

Really though I'm at a loss to see what the 6 again was awarded for 2 tackles previous to the try. That was the really shocking decision from kendal. He did it to us all game, Hull got a few against them too. Absolutely appalling referee.

I couldn`t see any reason either, he just seemed to buckle under the pressure from the home crowd.