Surely the bigger question is: why did Alibert ask for the offside? He has himself and two other officials to pick these things up. Why refer it?

Because he's a clown and doesn't have a clue. They were offside all match.

I think because it was so messy he just wanted a coverall to make sure he hadn't missed something. Plus he probably had Lee Briers chewing his ear off.

I think that probably covers it.

... oh hang on ... that could also be a factor.

Well looking at the replay Alibert was indeed 11 back from the play, with pretty much all of the Saints players at least one foot in front of him (may I remind you that both feet must be behind the ref.) Now here is the debate from earlier - is it the pitch 10 or the refs 10 or 11 but slightly in front. Too confusing.

Alibert's = all off side.
Pitch = at least 2 players a stride in front of the 'lines on the floor' 10 m.
Result = doesn't matter one jot. We mucked up, Saints finished nicely.

Defo think however Mr Cummings needs to address the way refs uniformly indicate the 10. If not for the players but for the crowd!

No issue over the result and a good game by both sides. No issues over the end result of this incident given the constraints placed on the VR system. BUT:

Alibert messed up no1 by specifically asking the VR to look at the offside.

Gansom initially messed up by appearing to be willing to award the offisde penalty

The RFL have messed up by giving VR technology to sort out mistakes and then making them sit on their hands (metaphorically)

The refs mess up by not standing 10 (THATS TEN....NOT TEN GIVE OR TAKE DEPENDING ON HOW THEY FEEL) at the play of the ball. Some refs say they stand just over 10 so that their view of the line is not impeded by the next player in the line.. use the touchline officials!!!!!!!!!!! Are we going to end up with 1 metre markings like they have in US footballs. The players might now how a "ref likes to work" BUT like the players and the game, the refs should have a set of rules. This will at least allow the fare-paying spectator the chance of make well innformed and thought out areguements for screaming.."OFFSIDE...GET THEM BACK"

Two further questions for the ref - and before anybody jumps on me, Wire only had themselves to blame for last nights defeat.

1) when Wilkins bawled at Alibert after being penalised for holding down, he was asked to go to the ref for a telling off. Wilkins ignored him and Wellens stood in for him. Why did Alibert not insist on speaking to the player, and why did he not move the penalty forward by ten yards?

2) As half time approached, and Riley kicked the ball forward, he was tackled by two Saints players. Alibert was going to let play go on until the touch judge intervened and a penalty was awarded.
Now, at a home game this season, Riley was sin binned in the first minute for holding down after an opposition break. Why was one or both players not sin binned for the professional foul?

As I said, I am not blaming those decisions for the loss, but I am getting extremely frustrated at the inconsistencies of referees from game to game, and within games.
Am I the only one?

There will be many opinions as to your first two points ranging from "got it bang on" to "the guys a muppet and has no bottle". What I would say is I think that every sane fan posting on this or any forum HATES inconsistent referring. Differences in opinion from one ref to another is inevitable (they are of course contray to many peoples opinion ..human) but god knows how a ref can be so inconsistent about his own decisions within a single game and often within a single 15 minute spell!

Cummings has confirmed before that the whole ref's standing 12m back and allowing players in front of him in nonsense that gets repeated time and again. The ref is meant to stand 10m back, and he marks the offside.

Can't find the quote, unfortunately.

It was James Graham that bawled at Alibert

He should be spoken to by the RFL for that on 47 minutes on live SKY you could cleary hear him shout to Alibert, "Move just F***in move".