Like to see Washbrook has improved...gone from crap to crapper.

Mathers also talked the touch judge into a penalty against Martin .

I knew it was gonna be one of them games from ganson when he did he us for 10 when the south stand answered back

Didn't see anything in the incident to warrant a caution , Let a lone a on report conclusion.

Why not, surely one of the big reasons for putting people on report is if something is reported to the referee that he didn't see, so that video footage can be reviewed? It's the same with biting/thumbing accusations, or Pryce and Hopoate kinkiness.

biting and the old thumbing yes i think should but not for a high shot that he dint think was a pen him self just because wakfiled say.
What gets me is i just have no faith in the officials and can see them
dishing out a ban.

I agree with this. "On report" [ishould[/i be used if the ref or touch judges did not see enough to make a conclusive decision regarding an incident. It should [ionly[/i be used in these circumstances.

The problem is that it is instead used as a cop-out for not making sin-binning/sending off decisions. Either use it properly - [inot[/i for passing the buck and letting guilty players remain on the pitch - or abolish it altogether.

Interesting that the tj flagged for both this incident and also Lauitiiti on Yeamo, yet only one went on report, and arguably the least bad one. (the Yeamo on was a shocker)

But it wasn't a straight high shot call was it? It was about whether or not Moa made contact with Southern's head with his knee or foot or something, and if so whether or not it was intentional. Ganson & the TJ seemed to either think not or be unsure, the Wakefield players appeared insistent, so he put the incident on report to be reviewed. I don't have a problem with the way he handled it at all.

Exactly.

Did the TJ flag? I didn't think he did, I thought it was Ganson who called him over after the Wakey complaints. I remember the TJ signalling for the Martin one.

Thought he did, but could be wrong.

Conversely, of course, we had the opposite the other week when Silverwood clearly did not see enough to make a decision on Sam's shoulder charge (as he didn't react 'til he had Bentham whispering in his ear). Despite this being a clear-cut case for "On Report" the idiot sent him off.

Poor old Sam the loser on both occasions, it seems.

I really hope the evidence shows Sam to be in the clear on this latest one [iand[/i the judges make the right decision this time. Otherwise we really could see a Lauaki-esque collapse of confidence.

I've said it before, putting anyone on report should be an automatic sinbin as well to get away from the cop out scenario, i suppose the example of todays incident is a bit of a curve ball but i'm sure that could be overcome by having another alternative signal.

just checked the RFL website and Sams not going forward to the panel tomorrow so is free to play on friday.

He never flagged , Ganson called him over.

3 charged but no mention of moa so no case to answer [url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/24506/three-stobart-super-league-playersrfl news[/url

Interesting that the Wigan badge means that Lauaki now receives cautions instead of bans.

Bridge was tweeting that he wasn't getting anything earlier, I thought