The decision was correct. In a manner of speaking you are correct in what you are tyring to say however in the history of video refereeing the team potentially scoring have always been the attacking team.

Yep, I wear contact lenses instead.

I'm a teacher, you? Not that I'm sure what it adds to the discussion.

So if you, from that position of knowledge, told me that Bloom's Taxonomy was used to underpin the foundations of pedagogy, I would listen to you.

I said I'm a teacher. Not a student of learning or education. I wouldn't even try!

Are you trying to tell me you're a Super League referee?

The video ref when asked to judge if a try had been scored or not had to go back to the tackle on Hodgson.Now in that tackle Hodgson was judged to have knocked the ball forward in the tackle.Then KL knocked the ball on himself imiterial of Delaney being offside.The first offence was by hodgson knocking the ball on so Leeds head and feed.

How did you achieve a teaching degree without an understanding of how people learn???

When deciding who is attack/defence, the VR is looking at the status of the play, at the point that play can no longer develop legally i.e. is dead.

In this instance, Wire knock-on (play on), Leeds knock-on (play is dead) - Wire = attack, Leeds = defence.

Delaney becomes involved AFTER the play is dead and his actions have no bearing on the attack/defence terminology.

Even Silverwood needed clarification, as he didn't know what the VR was actually seeing.

You should see the terminology changed to reflect the team's name shortly in the future, to avoid further confusion.

I'll have the Castleford game archived on Doovde but not that easy to search through however I do have several games on the old Sky+ box and the first one I found to quickly scan has a strikingly similar incident to the one under discussion here.

Leeds playing from right to left in relation to the main camera position. A kick through by Leeds into the opposition's twenty metre zone. A kick return by an opposing back running out of his own left field. A big legal hit by the kick chase team causing the ball carrier to spill possession. A Leeds knock forward by one player, the ball picked up by another stood in front in a now offside position who picks up runs to the line and scores.

Without splitting too many hairs it couldn't really be any more perfect an example to reference yesterday's ruling against for video referee on-screen terminology consistency.

Put me out of my misery then!!!

I'm a Primary School teacher. What I studied to get my first class degree I quickly found had little relevance in the classroom.

So, are you a SL referee - I presume so as you claim I should listen to someone with the relevant experience and knowledge of the situation

Good thread this.

Briers didn't knock on. Briers also obstructed Hall and correctly got penalised. Leuluai did knock on, and it was correctly a scrum to the defending team.

Lovely stuff.

Yes, as does having the video referee coming from Warrington itself ....

See also Russell "Penalty try, Russell ... Your call" Smith

You are James Child ... I am holding a current copy of the match programme and I claim my five pound prize

You are not seriously blaming the match officials' are you???

We were only arguing about the terminology for the restart...you've gone too far...too far!

You are James Child ... I am holding a current copy of the match programme and I claim my five pound prize

The Game: Leeds V Hull SL 17 Round 20
Date: 6th July 2012
Ground: Headingley
Referee: Tim Roby
Video Referee: Ian Smith

Detail: Players: Danny McGuire kicked long downfield and leads the kick chase with Kevin Sinfield and Carl Ablett in support. Tom Briscoe returns the ball but is met firmly by McGuire, the ball is spilled by Briscoe. McGuire attempts to gather but only succeeds in nudging the ball forward on the ground where Sinfield - stood just ahead of McGuire and ball - picks up and runs the final ten metres to touchdown after evading Ryan McGoldrick's attempted tackle on the line.

Detail: Officials: The in-game clock stops at 24:27, referee Tim Roby calls zero tackle and asks the video referee to check for a Leeds knock on after Hull lose ball on impact and for the grounding. Video referee Ian Smith checks for the double knock on (doesn't need to check the grounding) makes the decision after 1 minute 22 seconds of deliberation between himself and the rulebook.

Outcome: NO TRY ..... SCRUM ATTACK

Obviously

Phew - I thought I was cracking up!

I remember that now. I was watching it on my iPhone on school residential with about 10 kids crowded around me. We didn't have a bloody clue what was going on!

I watched it later and it was a tiny, but obvious enough touch by McGuire that Smith took a long time to decide over but got right in the end.

But apparently pressed the wrong button dboy?!!!

It wasn't a big deal at the time, but it did lead to a discussion about what the protocol should have been, as per the decision at Wembley. Erm..so I have been told.

I expect that the teams name will be used in the near future - the system just isn't clear enough at the moment.

Mind you, knowing the refs bosses...

That is how I have always seen the terms used. I'm sad and would probably have noticed and remembered had it been used differently at a game I was watching either live or on TV.

Team names would be easier for the masses - I agree!

This is true but you must remember that sports players impart an extra force on a ball by striking/throwing it in such a manner that it spins thus causing it to bend in it's trajectory (banana shot) or bounce off an object at an unexpected angle. You must also take into account the force applied by gravity.

[url=http://viewtopic.php?p=17084796&tsmp=1346009861#p17084796[uCONFIRMATION THAT IT WASN'T A KNOCK ON[/u[/url

Have watched it back and it was definitely a knock on. Still, although it came at a crucial time Leeds still wouldn't have won.

Except to the letter of the law, it wasn't.

Which is?

The ball initially went backwards off Briers' contact then bounced forwards. To the letter of the law that isn't a knock on, but in my opinion, it should be.

I personally thought it went forward and briers fell past it. It was a very tight one and I don't think those images show either way.

Except that it wasn't. It went backwards.