Deary me Thewlis - that 'statement' is embarrassing.

Danny Brough displayed immense restraint? Erm... really?
It's not fair that we don't get as much recovery time as Hull? Boo fricking hoo - what's that got to do with anything?

Put a cork in it and get on with your job, you whining tart. I said it after the Mason sacking fiasco; this guy is not good enough. Davy needs to replace him with someone who has half an idea.

Like Ralph rimmer?

As I've written elsewhere, "So, the ref goes to the big screento check whether a try has been scored. 6 camera angles do not show anything positive. the 7th shows that a try has been scored. Your argument would show the words "NO TRY" on the screen.".

It's not really the same thing as what happened on Sunday. In your example, the first 6 angles don't show whether it was or wasn't a try, but the 7th one shows it was. Therefore I would say it is a try.

However on Sunday there were only 2 angles, on one it looked over and on the other it looked wide. It looking wide is different to it not revealing anything at all.

Therefore on Sunday you have a 50/50 call and it just didn't happen to go your way. You win some, you lose some.

Well nice to see a Bradford fan on here 'crowing' bet he hasn't worked out Mullally will be on his way back when Brett gets his 6-8 match ban !!!

Regrettably at the moment -we lose most !

But hey ho Its history! eh?

You dont go to RL anymore to watch an unbiased fella ensure two teams compete on a level playing field --you go and watch how much a prima donna officials can influence a competition between two teams



I appreciate the fact that linesman tell us the balls gone into touch (for the avoidance of doubt pehaps?)

A French video ref (not at a match between two English teams) but where a French teams involved!

Perhaps a home grown ref if Brazil get to the World Cup final ? Why not ?

.......and the rule changes do nothing!

Charge down /or played at the ball
Forward pass / or momentum
!0 yards at play the ball / no 7 or 8 will do and move up as its played
A well judged kick into the in goal area by attacking team / no catch it with your foot over the line advantage to defence
Good defence by holding attacker up and stopping grounding / no --have another go attackers!

Inrepretation -thats the name of the game!!

And reviews of matches bring ...................nothing

And disciplinary panels --- early guilty pleas get you leniency! Wow

And the same referee consecutive or alternate fixtures?
(..........and he`ll have forgot indiscretions from the previous fixture ! )
I dont think so IMO , "He`ll be watching you"!! hardly unbiased !

And since "technology"?
We`ll soon have to allocate Sky slots of 2 hours to allow for camera re-runs from goodness knows how many angles!

This is absolutely nothing to do with the dg miss and subsequent furore and statements . In my view we should have taken the "two" from a kickable position (especially as it was a "one off" knockout game ) The "tee" was coming on (I believe) surely that means PA had made a decision? Then suddenly we run it ! However as I say - result stands
The adjudicators decision is final -Get over it !

No --though biased like most supporters --watching other games on Sky where frankly , other than a preferred result that assists us , I couldnt care less ...... the above still stands

Its not an easy job & I wouldnt want to do it !

But as a paying customer , I think our great game deserves better standards than rul changes has achieved and creating so called professional officials has produced .

IMO (as youve probably gathered) its POOR !

As Ivor has said. For e.g. I have seen many video ref decisions where it looks like a player has knocked on from a few angles, but then 1 angle shows the ball as a try... As soon as there is evidence that the ball is cleanly grounded then the attacking team always gets the benefit of the doubt and the try is given, so if one angle shows the ball clearly going over the posts then how can you say it wasn't a drop goal?? Would have been interesting listening to all these Saints fans if the decision went against them, I'm sure they would be saying different to what they are now!

At the end of the day we should all agree that super league refs currently are not good enough and are ruining OUR game! He went to the screen to check a tackle in the air, but didn't go for the most important decision of the game!

Had the clown gone to the video ref there would have been no argument.

Oh well, at least you will get a week off come the next round of cup games

*Chuckles*

Regards

King james

It's not clear from video I don't believe. One says yes and another angle the opposite.
For what it's worth, my gut says yes but you weren't necessarily robbed as Saints may well have drawn with their own DG??? and what about the 3 charged down? Plenty of opportunities methinks?

Yes there would .

Smith would have probably said inconclusive and referred it back to Bentham.

what happened to the benefit of the doubt?

not being in the challenge cup after this has cost the club a six figure some... depending on how far we would of got... they have a right to be aggrieved as do the fans, not often you get the chance to go to wembley for a cup final and it has been taken away by us

Ian Smith has come out and said if Bentham would have gone to him he'd have dissalowed it also?

He was hardly going to say anything but was he ....would the RFL really have allowed Smith to say anything that wasn't in support of Bentham ?

Have you read your local rag today guys?

[urlhttp://www.examiner.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/news/referee-phil-bentham-say-huddersfield-6933413[/url

Smith WOULD have referred it back like I said.

Yes, that's what i'm referring to....he was hardly going to say.." no Phil got it wrong and i would have awarded it" was he, imagine the meltdown at Red Hall if one ref had have gone against another !!

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/ru ... -1-6547688 Everyone can stop crying now.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/ru ... -1-6547688 Everyone can stop crying now.

Don't count on it.

I would say quite the reverse mate. That whole piece reads like a poor excuse. The WHOLE or the refs review didn't disagree...well woop-de-doo! The fact that many of them obviously did, the players did and, as the piece points out, the consensus from the rugby league world did hardly justifies his 'I was right and everyone else was wrong' standpoint. As for Smith saying he would have referred it back; well he would say that, wouldn't he!

I wouldn't say the consensus is that it was a DG. The general consensus from the Huddersfield fans is obviously that it was a DG. Most other folk see it the more reasonable way, i.e. one angle shows it was a goal and the other angle shows that it missed.

I am yet to see any evidence that can categorically prove it was or wasn't a DG. It was therefore a 50/50 call that didn't go Huddersfield's way.

Would it have been OK to have an English video ref then?

Can we also look up what 'consensus' means, please.

again.... 'benefit of the doubt' ?

RFL in sticking together shock