I can understand the fury and apoplectic rage on VT and the Giants page.

That pass in the build up to the Giants' second try was a mile forward. The fact he gave the try shows clear bias.

Durham giant is right the Hudds fans who showed up on mass in their tens yesterday don't deserve to have to watch games where the score line is decided by a corrupt Illuminati working behind the scenes.

It's time match officials were made to declare if they are members of the Freemasons or not like the police. In fact forget Hillsborough and Orgreave we should have an inquest into the goings on at the John smiths stadium yesterday.

Like some coaches call for players to be banned for as long as the offended player is injured for in cases of foul play. I call for refs to be banned for as long as a team doesn't win a competition because of a ref. I'm sorry to say it's entirely Phil Benthams fault Huddersfield haven't won the challenge cup since 1953.

A ban of 61 years is therefore the only sensible solution and I can understand why that would be the only thing palatable to usually fair minded brearley.

I think we should have a protest at our next match. We can make a banner.

We could take it to Giants end of season party, tonight

Even better, we could make t-shirts

I am getting a strange feeling of deja vu.

I'm sure I've seen a game with an unpunished voluntary tackle before.

And I'm sure I can remember a game where the ref went to the VR multiple times but then decided not to for the final decisive kick at goal.

This does seem familiar....

Also....... Tansey

Got to say it was inconclusive on the replays where one shot suggested it might have been and the opposite angle suggested it might not. I've seen more obvious goals than that chalked off, to be honest.

As for the voluntary tackle, well, isn't it time Saints were on a warning for those? After all, they do have form..

What I want to know is whether or not neanderthals count against the salary cap.

I think it's some form of government scheme where clubs are actually paid to take them from the cave & keep them off the unemployment register. I actually thought than Bentham in the main reffed it well. He made a glaring error in penalising McGilvary (sp) for being pushed by Walsh & then not referring the Walsh drop goal upstairs. Which is one less mistake than the knuckle dragger fluffed in drop goals alone.

Some wag just posted on Twitter:

Message from Manchester airport. Danny Brough's dummy landed at 12:03pm


Sorry pinched from elsewhere - made me laugh (nearly as much as watching yesterday!)

[url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?5152ferres charged with grade E[/url

Whats the betting its 5 matches? Allows him to turn out at Magic.



One of the worst spears I've seen in a long time, deserves a long ban.

It'll take more than Ferres missing for us to win at tragic weekend.

I still reckon that drop goal missed from Brough, each angle does show it differently but the one from behind him people are not taking into account the slightest of angles due to the camera not being directly behind him,

Im sure a Saints fan inline with him will clarify this



However on to to voluntary tackle, they only deem it as voluntary if the player gets up and plays the ball without being touched (which is stupid as can clearly see when someone drops on the florr like a bag of spuds)

Unless we have Bentham reffing of course in which case Hudds will have no chance obviously...

nah, you only need to watch the shot from behind, which happened to be bang in line, to see the ball didn't deviate at all, it held a firm and straight line inside the post.


that would be a voluntary tackle, but not what we are talking about here. the rules say a plyer must regain his feet and attempt to play on. if he just stays down, then eventually he has to be penalised. of course that never happens, though it would, because the defenders eventually just can't resist placing a hand on, which effects the tackle and prevents a penalty. just like this weekend, and just like Joynt.

VR decisions often involve different camera shots which give different and sometimes contradictory views. One of the tries awarded on Sunday wasn't conclusive on some of the replays. They usually go with the replay that gives the clearest view, which surely was the one from behind Brough.

In some ways not, because that is a highly zoomed shot from behind the other posts, and therefore the significant foreshortening produces distortion. However, I do believe that ultimately the view from that camera would clearly prove that it was a DG, if only they would show it, as if you keep with that shot it would show where the ball landed, from that vantage point. And as I have shown on the VT thread that would clearly be on a line between the posts. I'm not sure why they didn't show that bit of footage at any point, but so far they haven't.

Maybe the VR's have been secretly instructed to spice things up a bit by introducing an element of poetic justice to their decisions?

We've got Bentham for our game on Friday



Let's hope it doesn't come down to a drop goal....

Both teams should try for one on Friday, should get a good cheer! I suspect Bentham won't be appointed a Shudds match for a while, like we had a rest from Ganson after MM.

Except that, whereas Ganson, along with his chum Klein, definitely made [more than one mistake, which were clear and undeniable on the video and he even admitted one of them publicly, there is no actual evidence that shows that Bentham [idefinitely[/i made a mistake.

As long as that remains the case, it is just one opinion versus another - and the ref's opinion trumps all.

That explains why Brough looks like he does then.

Made my day that comment.

Oh absolutely, I've seen it a few times and I'm not convinced either way, but no one has had a better view than the ref did on the day, so you've got to go with his call, shudds should just instal some bigger posts, I suspect it wouldn't have cleared the ones at headingley and the decision would have been easy.