Classic example of whats being discussed here really!

Sandercock said on sky he can think of 5 games where rovers have been cheated out of wins by the referee this season (This was on the ipad app, not sure if the same article is on the website).

They have lost 7 games this season, in the one they lost to us they had no reason to blame the ref, that means there's only one other game they have lost all season down to the playing squad and the coach.

Rotten luck really, they'd be top of the league if it wasn't for these pesky referee's!

We don't even muster enough enthusiasm for a trolling thread nowadays.

Does it matter more to Rovers fans? Possibly. But if so, only slightly IMO. You're right to point out the history, and to some extent that was something we had to get out our of systems. But 36-6 seemed cathartic for you all also, in its own way. After losing 6 from 7 some of you were ready to celebrate a friendly at the start of 2010.

It has been a quirk of fate that a number of SL derbies have had additional significance for us. Cooke's second game being our first win in about 7 and then securing survival in 2007, first play-off win in 2010.

Also wins have to matter more - we shrug off defeat but remember the victories. It's what makes it bearable. So [uthis one[/u does matter more to us.

The majority of games have contentious decisions made by the officials, the only way to improve our product as a spectacle to attract more supporters either at live games or on TV is to take the game forwardd with either/both video refs at all games, and 2 refs as in the Ausie game.
In the meantime we will still be frustrated with wrong decisions, all coaches over the past few seasons have complained about the officials without any improvement being made or offered.
The rule now is that you cannot go to the video ref for a forward pass, but you can for offside. If we had video refs with a screen the oppotunity should be given to the on field ref and touch judges to review the offence from a different angle to his/their original position and make a better assessment of the pass.
Two refs is simple to implement, promote those from the championship!! it would probably take 30 mins to administrate;0)..............if they (RFL) say it's not practical to implement, well how do they explain when Ledds were on a Friday night game the ref I believe was Silverwood and the touchy's were Childs and Hicks???????????

I completely agree, however rarely do they effect the overall outcome of the game, in rugby league the better side tends to win regardless of the referee, unlike football where a decision can swing a game either way.

What leaves a bitter taste here is that Rovers were not the better side and on the back of two very poor decisions were suddenly in a position to win a game that they quite simply wouldn't have without the referee, (not taking any credit away for the final try, brilliant rugby)

The two officials thing is such a simple and obvious move it would take an organisation as hopeless as the rfl to ignore it.

One ref marshalling the 10, the other watching the ruck, simple.

Oh and it might be an idea to let touch judges make decisions because at present they only seem to check if goals go through, useless!

Totally agree, being saying this for years, the game is far to fast for one ref now, it is light years different to the game i started to watch in the 70's.
It is all about speed and scoring tries nowadays, the game has changed to make it more attractive to TV, the powers that be want games to be 32-30 end to end entertainment and i am convinced the refs are told to make it that way by 'evening up' games to keep them competitive.
There is no way one man can see everything and police everything, he needs at least one more offical on the pitch and far more help and input from the touch judges.
The RL should take a look at American football to see how they do it, they do not miss anything.

I would be happy to pay an extra £1 per match to allow/ pay for each game to be televised to a big screen descision wether on sky or not and have two or more refs on the field to make sure this crap does not happen
no brainer for me

The nature of refereeing in our games is so inconsistent that it is quite easy to look back through the game and find a decision that goes against you, however making a reasoned case for this being the reason for defeat would be much harder.

Hull probably have had the best case for this all season with the incidents on Saturday, even then you can point to the awful defending at the end which gave Rovers the 4 points which ultimately cost them the game.

Rovers were unfairly helped into that position by the referee, but once that had happened Hull should have completed their set's and defended as a team, they didn't and they lost.

Only if the forward Dobson try was the one which won them the game in the last minute, would Hull be able to complain the referee actually cost them the game, as it was the wrong decision and they wouldn't have had the chance to reply.

Well said.

Even easier, take a sponsorship deal which pays money and use the money to make video refs available at each game and pay for 2nd on field referees.

Now stop being sensible, you know its the RFL and sense/logic is not something in the filing cabinets at Red Hall.

I would defy any team to defend the number of sets we had too in that second half due to the totally un-warrented penalty count.

While I agree with you, no side can go through 46 minutes (last penalty to FC was on 34 minutes) without conceding a single penalty, especially in a derby game and on a hot day. That is not the reason Jordan Turner shot out of the line and missed his tackle.

Why not? Teams have gone 80mins without giving a penalty away

What you're saying is you can't conceive the possibility of a team playing for just over half a game without cheating in some way?

In the Good Friday game back in 2009 at the KC, the only penalty Rovers got all game was in the 1st minute when Tickle put the kick off into the North Stand.

79 mins & 50 seconds without a penalty and we still won.

Oh, by the way, Ganson was ref that day too.

That's terrible. I bet you all called him some names didn't you.

I maybe should have phrased it differently, of course it's not impossible, it's just highly unlikely and certainly a massive turn around in discipline from the first 34 minutes.

Funnily enough no. We saved our name calling for 3 days later when Thaler came to town on Easter Monday and assisted Huddersfield to a huge win. Morgan copped a fine after that particular rant. Thaler is to Rovers as Ganson is to Hull.

Cheating has nothing to do with it, most penalties are lazy, careless or caused by fatigue.

Rover's were not square at the POTB a few times and and offside a few more, this wasn't them trying to cheat, just caught out by the opposition, needless to say none were given.

As I've said before I'm not blaming Ganson for the defeat, he certainly helped Rovers, but he didn't score their tries our miss our tackles, that's where the game was lost.

but Ganson is to every team !

you ask any fan of any SL team and they will say the same thing "Ganson is against us, he's always the bloody same" etc etc

he's made some real howlers at Perpignan over the years for and against the Catalans....

all refs get it wrong occasionally but when Ganson gets it wrong it seems to wrong [size=150'big time' ![/size

I get feed up of fans saying ref's don't miss tackles it's not they job to tackle it's they job to see forward passes square marking and over see all the rules .I am blaming Ganson he gave Rovers the momentum going forward .A ref is suppose to be impartial and consistent this man is non of these things .Not just with Hull Bradford have complaint's with this man He is a law unto himself

Would you like to enlighten us on one single "big time" mistake that he's given us to win a game then?

Any Hull fan can list 5, 6, 7 or more games that he has directly taken from us. That isn't bad refereeing, he's a cheat with an agenda!