[urlhttp://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/wolves/wolvesnews/5021216.Smith_blasts_video_referees/?ref=rss[/url

I thought all the decisions where the right ones. I thought King tackling Gleeson was 50/50 to be honest, King sort of sheparded Glees into that position, when Glees was only supporting Roberts (as would be expected) Solomona's decision was bang on, he clearly dropped it, and Solomona also definatly knocked on to rule out Briers(??) effort.

Still, take it away Tony.

He's not said he thinks the decisions are wrong has he? he's said he doesn't like VR's which he has stated before.

Fail.

Wait til they win a game thanks to the video ref, then he will change his tune.

Slightly over the top comments for me, the decissions were right from the video ref so that's that.

To be fair to the Wolves they didn't really get the luck on the night but they were not cheated out of anything.

As he says, if they go like that each week, they will be there abouts at the end of the season.

*Sigh* What does he want to do? Let the video ref give tries that clearly aren't?

can't say that I disagree !!!

ignoring Saturdays match (that was a tremendous game by both sides and so far this season a rugby great) there never seems to be confidence by the match official to either award or disallow a try; the technology is there to use but we are now in the realms of frame-by-frame analysis looking at every aspect why a try should be disallowed rather than why the try should not be awarded

take Monaghan's disallowed try; how many instances have there been in the past (Warrington included) where no more than a brush of the little finger has been deemed sufficient to award a try; suddenly we have an alternate set of rules to disallow a try for insufficient downward pressure or ball control; I bet that for any non-televised match Monaghan's (and come to that most likely Solomona's) try would have been awarded

it's the inconsistency of refereeing and video ref decisions that are hardest to understand

though Wigan just about edged the match; if I had to "moan moan moan moan" however, I would say the amount of holding down by Wigan is nonsense but again so long as the referee's do not penalise this will be continued

So what is he actaully saying then?

That he'd like the Roberts try to be disallowed & the Solomona one given despite the VR making the correct decision in both?


He finds the Video Ref Boring and he wants them done away with?
I'll tell you what is "Boring!", Tony Smith!

Maybe we could do away with Him!

Wire fan thinks Tony Smith is right about Everyhting Shocker!



As for Wigan's holding Down!
I think you've all been reading Richies Tweeter a bit too much me thinks!


I said last week that all he was doing was mischieving to try & con the refs into giving more penalties, it nearly worked.

Think he just wants the ref and his assistants to make the decision and so the flow of the game isn't taken away all the time, there was a few near me at the match who were getting fed up with it taking so long for Wigan tries and just wanted someone to make a call on it for or against without 5 mins of waiting.

Seconded.

Wigan were holding down in the first half alot I don't think they could live with the pace we wanted to play at IMO.

But if they had have been allowed by the Ref with no VR in place and "Would have/Should have" been disallowed if there was a Video Ref and it cost him the game then what would "they" & Tony Smith be thinking then?

5 x tries went to the VR, 5 Correct decisions were reached.

With that kind of success rate it's hardly an argument for getting rid of it just because he finds it "Boring".

Massive Fail!



Shame you lot aren't fit enough to keep that pace up for more than 50 mins then isn't it!

Think its more the time taken rather then anything else.

We have the technology so why not use it? Certain sections of the football media have been crying out for video technology for eons, but here we are with the technology to hand and people are moaning about it. Yes maybe if Sky hadn't been there some of those decisions may have gone the other way, but I for one like the VRs and long may they stay, ideally for every SL game.

ps, one piece of info Mr Smith may have overlooked is he does know that the VR was Bentham doesn't he? i.e Warrington's Phil bentham?

Watch the first half again.

IMO that how I saw it

I have no probs with the VR's calls the Gleeson/King one was maybe 50/50 but you give in doubt to the attacking team anyway.

He's not from Warrington anymore.

Added to the fact they need Biers on the pitch

I wondered what that news report about pitchforks and burning haybales was about as Bentham drove away from the ground

Smith only complains about the VR when his team loses due to the decisions.
When they win thanks to VR correct decisions he keeps quiet.
Well, there's a strage thing!

Without the video ref we'd have lost that game on Saturday without question but all the decisions were just about right and what the video ref does is stop all the whining and moaning about refs from the coaches after games.

We don't want to end up like football and having every coach coming out and blaming the referee when they lose.

*Cough* Martinez *Cough*

Was that intentional??

TBH i thought smith had more class than this to go crying about something when his team loses. Would he have said this if Warrington had won? Would he hell. Gone down in my estimations, hes almost as bad as Millward!

Literally the first time i've heard him say anything about a ref yesterday. He normally just says he's happy even when we lost 4-0, 5-0 or even 9-1



I was thinking more along the lines of Wenger, Benitez,Ferguson, Bruce, Allardyce etc etc.

It gets boring after they've blamed the ref for the 457th time.