Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Fri Feb 06, 2015 8:38 pm  

LOL, it's either a try or Catalan ball. Looked like a try to me, but how in gods name that is a goal line dropout only they can know.

Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Fri Feb 06, 2015 8:48 pm  

Sibbs Rhinos wrote:

LOL, it's either a try or Catalan ball. Looked like a try to me, but how in gods name that is a goal line dropout only they can know.

Escare knocked the ball onto the Saints player.

Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Fri Feb 06, 2015 8:49 pm  

Inside the in goal

Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Fri Feb 06, 2015 9:03 pm  

Well done to Phil Bentham!

More penalising of offsides please!

Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Fri Feb 06, 2015 9:10 pm  

The video ref decisions have been poor imo, but Bentham has been fine. Personally I would have got the yellow card out earlier (probably for Percival's offside), but he's got the vast majority of calls right. He called both of the video ref decisions as no tries, but tbf they are both impossible to call at full speed with one look.

Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Fri Feb 06, 2015 9:14 pm  

Mr. Zucchini Head wrote:

The video ref decisions have been poor imo, but Bentham has been fine. Personally I would have got the yellow card out earlier (probably for Percival's offside), but he's got the vast majority of calls right. He called both of the video ref decisions as no tries, but tbf they are both impossible to call at full speed with one look.

Good summary.

Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Fri Feb 06, 2015 9:28 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Childs' performance has been utterly farcical to be honest. The red card was not only a shocking decision, a massive over reaction to a clumsy challenge, but it came minutes after an almost identical (And even more deliberate) attack on the head of the Widnes kicker.

He's consistently given decisions Wigan's way, only he will know if that's incompetence or bias. I'm liking the first option, like most of the referees in Super League they have no common sense, no judgement and are weak individuals. Some of the decision making has been horrific, but it's the lack of consistency that is the problem and is what frustrates players, coaches and fans alike. If they gave the same decision for each instance, people would know what they could do, they would know how to behave. Instead everyone is left confused as he rules red card for Widnes, yet ignores identical tackles the other way.

He could have single handily decided the outcome of the game tonight. Widnes would have won this game comfortably if it wasn't for the referee and yet Wigan are currently winning.

Another new match official in the making.

Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Sat Feb 07, 2015 8:15 pm  

Mr. Zucchini Head wrote:

The video ref decisions have been poor imo, but Bentham has been fine. Personally I would have got the yellow card out earlier (probably for Percival's offside), but he's got the vast majority of calls right. He called both of the video ref decisions as no tries, but tbf they are both impossible to call at full speed with one look.

Which I think highlights the problem of forcing the referee to make a call under these new rules. If he can make the call he makes it, if he can't he still has to.

Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Sun Feb 08, 2015 2:17 am  

TheElectricGlidingWarrior wrote:

Which I think highlights the problem of forcing the referee to make a call under these new rules. If he can make the call he makes it, if he can't he still has to.

I have already explained to you why this is a ludicrous summing up, so why are you repeating it?

He is a REFEREE. That means he HAS to "make a call". It's his job. You seem to assume that just because a ref goes to the VR, that must be because he "cannot make the call" but that is obviously wrong, for the simple reason that if there was no VR then the ref would have no choice but to "make the call".

I do not exclude the possibility that rarely there may just be some incident so obscured that the ref actually "cannot" make a call nor can any of his assistants - but such a case would be once every 25 years I think. And even then, you'd be wrong - because then his call would have to be "no try", under the rules, since if he literally saw no evidence on which he could rule a try was socred then he can't award a try. So in all cases he CAN, and DOES make the call. He may on occasion not be "certain" but that's just part and parcel of his job.

Previous seasons IMHO diminished the refs' authority by not adopting the present system. Changing the system so that the ref's decision must be upheld except where it is indisputably wrong is a big improvement.

Re: Don't like threads purely about referees but... : Sun Feb 08, 2015 8:32 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

I have already explained to you why this is a ludicrous summing up, so why are you repeating it?

A better question would be why are you following me from thread to thread making the same hysterical noises?

He is a REFEREE. That means he HAS to "make a call". It's his job. You seem to assume that just because a ref goes to the VR, that must be because he "cannot make the call" but that is obviously wrong, for the simple reason that if there was no VR then the ref would have no choice but to "make the call".

I do not exclude the possibility that rarely there may just be some incident so obscured that the ref actually "cannot" make a call nor can any of his assistants - but such a case would be once every 25 years I think. And even then, you'd be wrong - because then his call would have to be "no try", under the rules, since if he literally saw no evidence on which he could rule a try was socred then he can't award a try. So in all cases he CAN, and DOES make the call. He may on occasion not be "certain" but that's just part and parcel of his job.

Previous seasons IMHO diminished the refs' authority by not adopting the present system. Changing the system so that the ref's decision must be upheld except where it is indisputably wrong is a big improvement.

If you think a referee being unable to make a call comes around once every 25 years then you clearly don't watch much rugby league. As for his authority, it is no more diminished by the VR than it is by a touch judge making calls on the ball going into touch. We have at our disposal a specialist position in the VR who, like the touch judge, has advantages over the referee in particular decision making circumstances. When we have a VR the question of what decision a ref would have to make without a VR is totally irrelevant and, as I keep saying, unnecessarily restrictive.