the other one doesn't even dispute that ball go to the area behind the posts just whether it goes to the left of the post before going past it to the area behind the post before curling away again. The other angle proves it went through the post before curling away again.

You cannot have a view from dead on behind the posts that sees the ball take a trajectory through the posts and it not do so.

That isn't what I said. The other angle is irrelevant. We saw the ball go through the post from dead on behind them we cannot see that unless that happened.

The front on view of the DG is not anywhere near as central as the one from behind the posts so distorts where the ball is going (thus looks like it is going wide)
The camera angle from behind is far and away the most telling (like other angles used for tries).
This has the hallmark of a Saints (or big/top 4 team) to win at all costs officiating.
Absolutely no excuse to not go to the VR and as for the knock adjudged by Smith in the first half that is even worse. Even JD called this ffs!
The RFL and its officials are letting the sport down on a massive scale..

You did say, it's back there on the previous page in black and white, go double check.

We saw another angle where it looked like it missed, we couldn't have seen that unless it happened......see how easy it is to debate it.

Went wide for me. One angle shows it marginally heading over, but on the second angle it is clearly wide until it has long passed the uprights.

Very close, but wide. But why not go to the video ref - unless of course the ref had a great view and saw it clearly wide. Which would be the reasonable explanation.

Bentham was in a good position to see it for himself. Im unsure if it went over or not as the shots seem to show different things.

No I didn't. And no, that angle showed it may have missed. The other showed it did go over.

You said "there is no possible trick of sight where that ball does not go over".......

But in the quote above you've just said "that angle showed it may have missed."

End of argument.

I predict a smokey 'I'm right I'm right I'm right'-a-thon....

No, there is no trick of sight from the angle of behind the goal. It goes over. That angle is not a trick of sight. The trajectory in relation to the camera, it takes shows it could not have been

It is possible for another angle to not be as clear. I readily admit there is one. That however would be a trick of sight. And the problem there isn't whether it goes behind the posts but whether it's trajectory takes it through the posts or to the side of the posts and then behind them, the other angle obviously clarifies that.

Yes, 100%

Just heard on good authority that Nigel Wood is in a right panic, They've got the carpet lifted but nobody can find the brush!

Except that isn't true is it. We have the VR.

Walsh lost the ball so he has every right to go for it. Walsh had no right to stand up and strike him.

The point is Bentham had lost the confidence of the Huddersfield players at that point and effectively he briefly lost control. When players feel hard done to and unfairly treated they get frustrated and more aggressive. If it weren't for that string of penalties I do not believe Ferres would have been sent off and a player potentially badly injured. There can be serious repercussions of poor referreeing. If Ferres gets banned so should Bentham, IMO.

So Bentham in some peoples opinions makes some iffy (but hardly shocking calls) so that means Ferres is led to pile driving Lomax WWE style?

As to JD's MOM "just for the drop goal"!!! There were several better players on the field. The game was decided by one man - and he didn't have a number on his back - he should have got MOM.

The only equipment you need in this case is a pair of working eyes (or even one will do); and a functioning TV set. I do know a lot about optics, lenses and parallax as it goes, but noe of that knowledge is needed or relevant when the view from behind the posts just happened to be dead in line, so we can watch the ball set off heading inside the post, and never deviate from that line. It is very simple. I haven't tried to complicate it or call on specialists or whatever, it couldn't be simpler.



"Guess what"?
Thanks. Up until we read that, we all thought that life had been placed entirely on pause, and none of us realised that the decision was "history". No, really we didn't.

The same kind of debate that happens in pretty much every sport where referees and tight games are involved?

IMO the only true solution to whether it went over would have been netting, which would have needed to be a lot higher than the posts, or an expensive camera system like PL football has. RL is not going to implement either, so we just have to deal with it.

It is just a game at the end of the day. And IMO even if Bentham was proved right over the call there'd still be plenty of people who insisted otherwise.

Huddersfield should just use this "injustice" as a spur for them to win the Grand Final.

Oh right so the touch judges can't make a call as to whether the ball goes over the posts from directly behind the sticks either then because a skewed angle from the other side of pitch is just as relevant is it?

Re the Brough DG attempt

1. Should have sent it upstairs
2. Whatever the decision, either Hudds or Stains fan would be here now saying it was the wrong decision...

The TV shots were inconclusive to me.

Pretty much.

If it was given the other way, we'd have the same posts and dicussion on here, the only difference is the aggrieved posters would have saints avatars and names and not huddersfield ones.

There is the benefit of the doubt video decision available.

Looked like a pretty good DG to me.

One thing that will haunt Broughy is his "Cheating c***ts" tirade that could be clearly seen on TV.

Genuine question - has a DG ever been referred to the VR? Does anyone know if it's actually within the remit of the VR to rule on DGs? I can't recall a single instance and I've seen a few dodgier decisions that today's.

Also bear in mind that the ref has to have some doubt to even think about a referral. Given that the camera angle nearest to Bentham's position appeared to show the ball sailing over the post rather than between them he may have been 100% sure in his own mind that it missed.

If you want to point the finger at a single individual for Huddersfield losing then look no further than Ferres. He doesn't make that idiotic tackle then Huddersfield win.