Quote ="Panda92"This was recently answered on the RFLReferees twitter page. https://twitter.com/RFLReferees/status/ ... 7973494785'" Is that from a ref, or just another Twatterer?

Quote ="Panda92"This was recently answered on the RFLReferees twitter page. https://twitter.com/RFLReferees/status/ ... 7973494785'" Is that from a ref, or just another Twatterer?

PB = Phil Bentham.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/22689281 Nay, Nay, Thrice Nay. We do NOT want referees to be 'characters' (other than 'the invisible man'). This isn't WWE.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/22689281 Nay, Nay, Thrice Nay. We do NOT want referees to be 'characters' (other than 'the invisible man'). This isn't WWE.

Ganson down as video ref for next mondays Hudd v St`s match

Good. He was only stood down from the Leeds Wigan game

Neil Hudgel, a man I'd contradiction, firstly states that the apology and dropping of Ganson was "wholly insufficient and tokenistic". Now he doesn't want Ganson to quit.

What exactly does he want?

His name in the papers. Hollywood Hudgell.

Apart from the fact that Neil Hudgell never mentioned wanting Ganson fired in his first statement and has stated exactly what he does want in his second you have a very strong argument there.

He wants a VR system that we can trust. The one we have has a long history or plainly coming up with bonkers decisions.

Why come out and say the apologies was insufficient?

There was inevitably a review of the process going to happen with such a howler.

Inevitably? The long history of howlers suggests to me that the review process is far from inevitable or effective.

The name of a good solicitor.

Yes, inevitably.

This long history of HOWLERS, name some which are not based on opinion or poor positioning.

Last years forward pass, despite being obvious to those observing, the officials missed it due to poor positioning.

The Tansey try in 2007, it was the failure to go to the video referee which caused the issue.

The incident this year was so clear that an investigation was a certainty.

Is Hudgell going to be called to account for his thinly veiled suggestion of bias directed at Jon Sharp?

If not, why not?

If that statement had come from a coach immediately following a defeat, he would at the very least be asked to explain his comments by the RFL.

Personally I would scrap it and accept the on field referee's decision.

I doubt the RFL would want to prolong this any further, how can they demand and explanation from Hudgell and sweep last Saturday under the carpet. They are already hypocrites in how they treat coaches who question a referee, but never sanction one for a poor performance (not including the token removals for one game on a VR). I am sure they will want this to go away soon.

I wouldn't bet against Hicks giving a couple of howlers in our favour on Sunday to balance it up and stifle the issue.

Agreed. If The weekends game has not been on sky, I doubt there would have been the much of an issue raised.

With the Video ref, it should be either al all games or none, IMO

Nice to see some perspective there. So actually Ganson's outrageous decision last year really wasn't all that bad when you just put it down to positioning. A stark contrast from him having always had it in for Hull FC which seemed a popular theme at the time.

At which point, everyone else will say that it's because Hudgell had a pop at Jon Sharp, even when it clearly isn't. Which is why he needed to keep his mouth shut.

Of course there is a difference to a split second decision (even if its plainly obvious to on lookers its wrong )to being able to review a passage of play several times from several angles.

But by the tone of your posts you appear unable to comprehend rational debate

Exactly-You need to be saying this to your fans who keep going on about karma.

At the end of the day, irrespective of how the error manifests, the two being compared ended up with the same result, and unjust 6 points.

That's the karma

How long do you reckon that would last, with multiple camera angles showing incorrect decisions by the on-field ref at every televised game? How long before demands for the VR to come back to sort out these 'ridiculous' errors?

While you're clearly doing it TIC, the karma thing, which ever side it comes from, is the most apalling . Why can't people just admit to enjoying a bit of schadenfreude, rather than hiding behind some one-sided notion of mystical justice? I'm not even going to exempt Buddhists, because the actions are the official's and the consequences referred to are for the team/club/fans.

What goes around, comes around... and around and around. Next time it happens to Hull, I'll laugh, as I did last time - not because I really believe they deserve it, but simply because I'm a , and it is all part of the fun.
Being a is one thing, a smug quite another, IMO.

You realise of course that in the context used 'karma' has nothing to do with mysticism and is just shorthand for 'what goes around comes around'? Or schadenfruede, even.