Just another bad call on the night - watching it back on Sky, did anyone else pick up Phil Clarke saying 'thank you, thank you, thank you' when that decision was given? He was delighted, you could hear the relief in his tone - even if it had been a correct call, Clarke shouldn't be responding to happenings in the match like that

Havent seen any commentary from last nights game yet but in relation to the Penny try, on the night watching the screen in the ground, they only reason I can see that it was given is that "commonsense" took plcae. All last season we were saying how the obstruction rule was ridiculous and so many occasions when " yeah but the defender would never have got there". Last night I think that part of the reason the try was given was that the Leeds defenders appeared to be backing away when Penny when through the gap. How could they have been obstructed from tackling him if they were going in the other direction. Dont know if technically the new rules covered this, but the spirit of the rules certainly did.

Ratchfords try (again based on the video screen only)..... downward pressure on the ball...TRY !

If there was downward pressure on that try I am really a nun called Rita

HI Rita how is the nunnery, only kidding I agree no try

there were a few dubious calls last night against both teams, the penny try (could have been disallowed by another set of officials,although i personally thought it was fine)
the ratchford "try"
the knock on against goulding ( again some officials would have given it)
the penalty against singleton for passing off the ground

however despite these, it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game,Warrington would still have won.

Spot on

Im not so sure, all those incidents go the other way than they did and you have a very different game.

Even just taking the Singleton no try, Leeds were picking up momentum and that would have made it 18-12 with a fair bit to go.

However, I'm not blaming the officials for Leeds losing, Wire were the better side.

What I will say is that I don't think the new VR rules are actually working, that ratchford 'try' was a clear no try and shouldn't have been given but I think the VRs seem hesitant to overturn any decision at the moment.

I think that relates to his piece on Sky Sports website about players being allowed to "go back and play it again" when passing after the "held" call or carrying on running when they think they haven't been tackled. He argued that if you play on after you've been tackled, you should be penalised as you would have been in previous years.

I got the feeling that he was praising the fact that instead of Bentham telling Singleton to play the ball again, he was actually giving (as it turned out, incorrectly) a penalty.

While I'd agree that Clarke's "anyone but Leeds" bias has been in full flow ever since the flak he got for his "rugby gods" column on Danny McGuire a few years ago, on this occasion I don't think that was the case. No doubt he'll be back in the full Cherry And White cheerleader costume for next week's game against Wigan though.

Ah fair enough, I've not seen Boots N All - he gets the benefit of the doubt this time then..... Just...