If his performance yesterday, when considered along with the numbers of howlers he drops on a consistent basis, the RFL will have a real problem on it's hands.

He dropped a ballock last week giving Salford a try that was clear touch in goal. He awarded a try after clear double movement at Crusaders, He had a nightmare at Cardiff to start the year. He is an all round very poor performer who would have been dropped but for some form of denial by Cummings.

show me where it says the ref has to count out the tackles in numerical sequence

It does not, but the ref has to officiate the rule, ie has to give a penalty for a 7th play the ball.

I'm sure in days of yore, the gentlemen used to pass the ball over to the other side and take tea. But for as long as I can recall the official generally tells the players it's the handover and that they should give the ball over.

On the odd occasion a player will make a meal of giving the ball to the other side and a penalty will result. It's usually when said player has no clue when or where he is.

As for the invisable knock on, looked pretty clear to me when you watch the vid, without the blinkers the balls changes rotation mid flight.

I'm sure you could get a scientist to run an equation for the forces needed to change the rotation of the ball. As for the old Joynt VT. It's not a completed tackle until the ref shouts held and a penalty is only given if the player attempts to play the ball.

As it was Joynt hit the deck, just as many players do nowa days, but then had to regain his feet as no bradford player touched him. He was then tackled by the player. The ball was only played after the tackle was effected.

Nothing like digging up old talking points as compared to something that is indisputable.

Of course a re-match will never happen, but it was Diskin saying the officials influenced the match too much. Thing is what he was talking about was a correct (In most peoples minds, but still debatable decision) about gaskell being obstructed, as it was the officials where far more influential in Bradfords favour. Disallowing 2 tries and given bradford an extra tackle to lead to their first try.

Either way what is done is done. But if the obstruction is a talking point for bradford, it's was hardly the most critical influence on the game some are trying to make it to be.

I've said elsewhere I thought Potter was over stating his case saying Bradford where the better side for their 2nd half performance. The score board showed 1 penalty each. in the 2nd half. it looked pretty even to me at the time. Hardly a dominating performance.

It's in the Referee's Book of Competences, hidden behind a cupboard in a dusty corner of Red Square. I mean Red Hall. Didn't you know about it?

I thought it was a bedtime fairy tale book for the young referees for reading at night?

Which was probably why the kick was more or less where the obstruction was made; as he dabbed the ball through it probably LANDED from the kick not more than a metre from where he kicked it, and it then ran on which would have no bearing.

It is a dodgy one though because he may have just deemed it to be a simple obstruction and ignored the fact he kicked the ball.