If the SOO is representative of the refereeing standards in the NRL it's not the only issue they need to look at. Instances of flopping on the tackler, passing from the ground after the tackle is complete, running into contact with a raised forearm/elbow, using the head as a lever to bring a player to ground, the grapple tackle were all missed (or simply ignored) by the officials.

On the other hand the play the ball was correct (under the current guidelines of an attempt with the foot being sufficient) 99% of the time and there was comparatively little messing about at the ruck.

I fully agree.

Even though I was rooting for NSW, if that was a try then you can clearly score whilst knocking on AND not having control of the ball (rolling over the line after it slipped through his grasp).

IMO, they should get rid of the "Benefit of the doubt" call.
If the ref has had enough doubt to send the call to the VR, then if he still can't decide it should be an automatic NO try.
There was doubt in the ref's opinion, so it should stand that any doubt on the part of the VR "confirms" the ref's suspicion.

I suspect that the only reason for giving the try if there is doubt is that the VR probably wouldn't be able to see enough to make an informed decision on either who gets the ball (attack/defence) or how the game should restart (scrum/penalty/10m ptb).

For that reason, they take the "easy" option of awarding the try.

It was a clear try. A wonder try as you admit.

Why check something that was a clear try as that?

Wastes time. Prolongs Dulls' defeat.

i heard phil clarke say before the game that the referees allowed a bit more during origin games but yesterdays reffing was a joke
if silverwood or ganson had been the ref in that game they would have worn out the whistle and sinbinned half the teams before half time
maybe they wanted to promote the biff element but using the head as a lever is banned cos of how dangerous it can be not cos it doesnt look good

as well as the last try looking dubious so was thaidays, all the video refs views were from the behind the goal cameras but once he had awarded the try they showed the angle from half way and it clearly showed inglis's arm knock the full backs arm away so allowing the ball steal and made it a clear penalty as the rules stand

There was a try given to Saints against Salford a couple of weeks ago (Scott Moore I think??) as a "benefit of the doubt" situation that, for me,was the straw that broke the camel's back with regards to video ref decisions. If that try can be given, then quite frankly anything can. Granted, given that the video ref was Ganson I shouldn't have ben too surprised, but from the camera angles given there was no evidence that the ball got anywhere near touching the ground, so surely benefit of the doubt should have been given to the defence? As for the last NSW try yesterday, allowing that was simply farcical!

He was loosing the ball. He had a very loose fingertip grip and the ball was coming free as it hit the ground. It's a 50/50.

Some referees will deem it's suffificent downward pressure, some will deem he doesn't have full control as he grounds it.

What it wasn't, was a ''clear try'' as some are suggesting.

If the same thing happened against leeds and the try was awarded, you'd get the same people on here claiming to award that try was a disgrace and he didn't have full control. They'd say it was a ''clear no try''.

The problem is alot of decisions come down to interpretation and will depend on who the video ref is. When decisions are down to interpretation you will get inconsustency. What is a no try to one ref, is benefit of the doubt and try to another.

I speak for no-one other than myself.

It matters not to me whether Leeds or the opposition stand to benefit from the ruling, I'll state my view of the incident on it's own merits.

IMO it was a clear try. McGuire had his fingers holding the ball all the way down to the ground where on impact it slipped away from his grasp and as that was after he had the neccessary control on grounding didn't prevent it being a try.

Do you still think Delaney caught the ball in line with where Sinfield released it?

Not sure why but SLTV has included the Bradford no try in the highlights but neither of the Leeds no trys in the second half- admission of guilt perhaps?

[size=50However there is a slow motion replay of the Sinfield pass to Delaney[/size

Theres an element of seperation between mcguires hands and the ball just before he grounds it. It does a small bobble on the ground because he's holding it sideways. It's not a clear try. Some will give it, some won't. But there's certainly doubt. IMO he doesn't have full control.

And it's an opinion you are entitled to hold.

What about the pass to Delaney now, is it still in line with where Sinfield released it as you stated on here the other day?

Can they not appoint one person with the sole job of video reffing every game? I'm not aware of an occasion where two games using video refs in England were being played at the same time. At least that way there would (or perhaps should would be more appropriate....) be a lot more consistency. With a different person being video ref every week we're bound to get inconsistency down to one person interpreting something differently to the next person.

That's a hobby-horse of mine, I've been asking the same question for the last few seasons.

The ideal appointment IMO would be Ian Smith. I rarely find his decisions anything but correct when he's in the role and that isn't a situation I find with any of the others on a consistent basis.

Of course Smith is also one of the 'magnificent seven' so it's unlikely to get off the ground until he's ready to hang up his whistle.

The other day delaney was level, but since then, he's decided to alter his position to about half a metre in front of sinfield.

well if you keep looking maybe you will get the right answer? he is (you are) moving in the right direction

It's an improvement I suppose but you've still a way to go.

IMO of course.

Perhaps in another couple of days you'll see McGuire scoring the disallowed try.

mcguires no try might have been a 50/50 but he deserved to have it awarded just for his effort
theres very few players that would have even had the awareness to even attempt to ground from his position

You're sounding like Phil Clarke.

He deserves a try 'only' if he got the ball down within the rules. I think he did.

Just going back to Origin and the NRL in general - the cry from fans over here was that the dual referee system would speed up the play the ball and make the Australian game much faster than SL, giving them an even bigger advantage.

Based on what I've seen on MSK since it went free to air the NRL doesn't actually seem that much quicker in terms of clearing the tackle area than SL - anyone elses thoughts on whether it has actually made a difference?

When they were looking at that decision I actually joked that it wouldn't suprise me if they tried to find a reason to give the try, I didn't really think for one minute that he would actually allow it.

I just dont understand how there can be so many contentious decisions. Take the Mcguire try, some so they believe it to be a clear try, some dont, but surely with the incorporation of 'benefit of the doubt', these 50/50 decisions should be going to the attacking team. But I don't want to get hung up on that one try, because this isn't about a Leeds try being disallowed, it's more the fact that some of the decisions that are given are absolutely baffling.

With regards to the NRL, I think it looks slower, however if you count the seconds between contact and the ball being played, it's usually around 4 or 5 seconds. Count superleague and you are lucky if it is less than 8 seconds. The muppets on sky said the other week that ours was actually faster, and that may be the case from hitting the floor to the ball being played (I've not counted them), but certainly not from the initial contact. The main difference between superleague and the NRL is the line speed in defence. As soon as the ball is played, the defence are in the attackers face, this makes the play the ball look slower as the attack dont often get much room to move. This may be why we are struggling to catch the Aussies, they dont particularly play any awesome moves, they just batter teams with consistant, error free rugby, playing for position before finding a weakness. Watch the NRL games and have a look at the usual completion rates, I have seen numerous that have got to 25 mins without either team making a mistake, and likewise without making a break, they just play fairly boring, but hard and fast rugby until one team wilts under the pressure.

That's my two penneth anyway!

Give it to Karl Kirkpatrick, he couldn't/wouldn't go full time because of his job but surely he could do this if the money was right.

Quote ="Old Feller"Give it to Karl Kirkpatrick'" www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ ... 769306.ece I wonder what the RFL's and Stuart Cumming's collective view on whistle blowing former whistle blowers. It still makes for a good read where Kirkpatrick talks about Ganson's gut (calf strain my a[irs[/ie) and Bradford firing off solicitor's letters demanding the two points back.

Quote ="Old Feller"Give it to Karl Kirkpatrick'" www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ ... 769306.ece I wonder what the RFL's and Stuart Cumming's collective view on whistle blowing former whistle blowers. It still makes for a good read where Kirkpatrick talks about Ganson's gut (calf strain my a[irs[/ie) and Bradford firing off solicitor's letters demanding the two points back.

I'm sure he's man enough to recognise what's best for the game.

No really..

I'd have thought with fulltime refs there'd be plenty of time each week to get together with the video of each game and go through the decisions, which would allow them to be consistent.

No evidence of it on the pitch though

How many 'full time' referees are there supposed to be in Super League this season?

Seven?

So why did Ben Thaler have to officiate at both the Salford - Warrington game and the Harlequins - Crusaders game and Ian Smith likewise the Leeds - Wakefield game and the Hull KR V Les Catalans game over round 16.

Where were Steve Ganson and Richard Silverwood (Jamie Leahy and Gareth Hewer.)