Honestly thought that Rugby League fans were knowledgeable,,then this comes up......ah well.!!!!!

They gave the penalty to Walsh for Mcgilvray lying on too long. Ref spoke to the linesman who says Jermaine would not get off Walsh to allow him play the ball as it was a half break and Saints where on the front foot. Correct decision.

the refereeing is ruining the game of rugby league.
ive thought rugby is corrupt since i went to a game in 1992 wakefield v leeds.
wakefield were 20-0 down at half time , they came out for the second half and got everything ,they won 22-20,
only to find out the ref lived on pinders heath and all is windows were covered with wakey stickers ,

To say that the Ferres 'pile-driver' was 50/50...????

Really..????

Straight red any day of the week.

As for the Brough drop goal, from the camera behind the sticks it looked through, but from the camera facing the sticks it looked suspect. Can a ref go to the screen from a drop goal? I've never known it happen before and was wandering why.

I think he can, as they sometimes go to check how the game should be re-started after the balls gone dead in-goal. This must surely mean that the video ref has the right to give a drop goal. A further question is, can he give a drop goal as 'benefit of the doubt'?

And yes, a definite straight red card for Ferres. An awful tackle.

That provision is in there to state that a kick can't go too far over, i.e it isnt disallowed because it went so high that it went above the space between the posts rather than above it. It isnt there so that ref or VR can speculate would happen in terms of ricochets etc. Above the posts is a drop goal.

The Walsh McGilveray situation, Walsh lost the ball, McGilveray went for it. Walsh covered this up by attacking McGilveray and forcing the ref to make a decision. Bentham bought it. He wasnt giving that decision until Walsh's reaction. Bentham got done by a pro.

Ferres deserved a red, no arguments whatsoever, but about 30secs before that Turner passed the ball off the floor and it should have been a pen to Hudds.

Saints certainly got the rub of the green from the ref. Its not biased, or corrupt or anything like that, they just had one of those days when a couple of decisions went for them that probably shouldnt have, and in a close game that makes a big difference. All teams have them

Fully agree.

If the ref was in a clear position to see the drop goal then he didn't need a second opinion. Brough turned away and didn't fully follow the flight of the drop kick so he could not say for certain. The two TV views were contradictory so going to the VT ref would not have helped. If the ball went exactly over one post then IMO it should be no goal as had the post been higher it would have bounced back.

The only call the ref may have got wrong was the drop goal by Brough ............ I've watched it several times on tv, and I have no idea whether it was wide of the post or not. It was a judgement call, and maybe the on field ref should have gone to the video ref, but even then I don't think a definitive answer would have been possible.

As for Ganson being a Saints fan, I've spoken to him on a number of occasions, and can assure you that he's never shown any signs of favouritism towards Saints; in fact in one conversation, shortly after the 2009 Grand Final, he was openly pro-Leeds.

In your opinion but not in the rules of the game.

Ganson is a Saints fan, I've seen him wearing a Saints top at a cup semi a few years back.

er yes in the rules of the game - the post is considered to go up infinately. Therefore if the ball went over the top of the line of the post it would be deemed as a miss.

People really should read the rule book...

Ganson was obviously a big saints fan growing up (its his town) and still is a fan, however if anything we get the rough end because of this as he knows everyone is watching out for it. His son Josh plays for England and Saints U16

I would not say you got the rough end of decisions or the smooth end either.

As evidenced by him handing the 2009 Grand Final to Leeds with his decision, leading upto the match changing try.

How on gods earth is the sending off a 50/50 call lol!!!

Wrong. Bentham didn't blow until Walsh pushed Jermaine. he then didn't know what to do, so consulted the linesman. it's not up to the linesman to rule whether he takes too long to get off. Even if he had, which he didn't, Walsh does not have licence to react like that.

It's as much up to the touch judge as the referee as all three consult numerous times a game via their mics on various issues. All this was cleared up in an SLTV programme with the controller of referees straight after Agar made his daft statement about Ganson (the referees' coach) going into the referees' room at halftime (to, er, coach).

That refers to the ball not going too high, not that the ref/toughjudge/VR needs to speculate on the bounce of an oblique spheriod moving at indeterminate speed, with an indeterminate rotation, with an unclear trajecotry off a cylindrical column with indeterminate rigidity. Because that would be impossible.

Saw Mr Bentham at the gym at lunchtime. He was certain it missed from his angle and it never entered his head for one second to use the video ref.

He will be avoiding twitter for a few weeks though.

Ian Smith was on GMR phone in on Sunday night and said if Bentham would have gone to the video ref he'd have dissalowed it also

How is it that everyone at that ground yesterday, including all the players and coaches, thought it was a drop goal, but the officials somehow think differently?

If Smith said that then he is a bigger idiot than I thought. From one angle it is touch and go on the video, but not conclusive either way. The only thing conclusive from looking towards the posts, is that all the players thought it was through. From the other angle, behind the posts it is a clear drop goal. At the very worst that would be benefit of doubt with a video official.

Maybe you should because you've made most of that up.

Quote ="DHM"Maybe you should because you've made most of that up.'" No, no he didn't Firstly, Quote ="the laws of the game" For the purpose of judging a kick at goal, the goal posts are assumed to extend indefinitely upward '" This is pretty well known. The more important ruling comes from the general rules of kicking a goal (which for the purposes of definition covers both goals and drop goals) Quote ="the laws of the game" A goal is scored if the whole of the ball at any time during its flight passes on the full over the opponents’ cross bar towards the dead ball line after being kicked by a player (and not touching or being touched in flight by any other player) '" important bit highlighted. (And before you say, no, the crossbar isn't infinitely horizontal, to go over the cross bar completely, the ball HAS to be between the posts.) Link here: rflmedia.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL%2 ... 202013.pdf

Quote ="DHM"Maybe you should because you've made most of that up.'" No, no he didn't Firstly, Quote ="the laws of the game" For the purpose of judging a kick at goal, the goal posts are assumed to extend indefinitely upward '" This is pretty well known. The more important ruling comes from the general rules of kicking a goal (which for the purposes of definition covers both goals and drop goals) Quote ="the laws of the game" A goal is scored if the whole of the ball at any time during its flight passes on the full over the opponents’ cross bar towards the dead ball line after being kicked by a player (and not touching or being touched in flight by any other player) '" important bit highlighted. (And before you say, no, the crossbar isn't infinitely horizontal, to go over the cross bar completely, the ball HAS to be between the posts.) Link here: rflmedia.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL%2 ... 202013.pdf

Mr Ganson is well known for his support of St Helens, he is regularly seen wearing his St Helens shirt in his home town. There use to be a rule that Refs had nothing to do with there home town clubs. Is it time the RFL returned to that. One can almost wish for the return of Russell Smith.

Re the 50/50 call, Ferres has been charged with a Grade E offence that carries a potential 8 match ban.