PTB and ruck issues are far more part of the game in the British game than for example the NRL where you hardly ever see it resulting in a cleaner ruck, faster ptb and faster game as a result.
That’s the place to start to fix it.
Using the Arundel incident as an example why did he not cleanly get to his feet?
Because of interference from the defensive line when trying to do so and with a full set to go had nothing to gain from trying to get what he already had, even the commentators including Widnes through and through KB said he had been harshly treated.
Once the tackle has been completed and the ref has called held / move whoever initiates contact after that should be penalised.
If it’s the attacker by moving forward of the mark it’s clear enough to see and it should be him.
If it’s the defender by pushing down or out on the player in possession then it should be him.
In both cases they are the ones causing the contact and the issues.
No doubt about the role of being coached on to exploit it like they did a season ago when deliberately passing the ball into a prone player near the ruck and geting a penalty off the back of it until the penny dropped and the opposite ruling came in and it stopped within a couple of weeks.
In any case coached or not whoever initiates the contact gets penalised.

Watch the Premier Sports footage again. It's a slow PTB because there are 3 or 4 men in the tackle, but once they have disengaged, Arundel clearly puts the ball on the ground whilst he still has one knee on the floor. That's an illegal PTB, it's not even remotely contentious, and as much as I have admired Kevin Brown's punditry this year, he's flat out wrong there.
As an aside, he's also not totally straight on to the goal line, which is also illegal..

But it’s not an aside and that 20 or 30 second period of the game is blatantly contentious.

Please follow your own advice and watch it again as a whole in the correct order instead of one small part of it out of sequence because the first offence was Widnes being yards offside at the scrum leading up to the play, the second offence was Craven being offside at the play the ball, both are penalty offences which happened before the ptb but weren’t given.

1 out of 3 in the wrong order can’t be the right decisions or end up with the right outcome and it’s the ref who was flat out wrong.

Examples of inconsistencies are, earlier in the game Arundel again gets penalised for holding onto the defenders leg whilst in possession at the ptb, fair enough yet when Fax are attacking minutes later Widnes clearly pull back a Fax players leg at the ptb, the ref see’s it but waves play on.

It’s not only happening against a Fax, Aston on 18 minutes gets tackled fairly and with barely any contact on him doesn’t regain his feet, does a flapping fish act and throws the ball away at the ptb but gets the penalty.

Whilst you’re looking back read my first post which clearly stated that against Widnes we were penalised for not playing the ball correctly on several occasions whilst in possession and it needed fixing for tomorrow’s game because Smith would see it along with the offsides, at no point did I say we shouldn’t have been.

Consistency is definitely the word. Yes, the coaches job is partly to examine the ref's and train the players accordingly. Up The Fax!

Ok I watched it again. I agree that Widnes were offside at the scrum, but that's on the touch judge, not the ref. Craven wasn't offside at the PTB and I'm not sure what you are seeing there, he clearly has his foot behind the line.

But all that is kind of missing the point, it's the relentless bagging of referees that I struggle with. The modern game is really hard to officiate because coaching methods have made the ruck/play-the-ball area so competitive and messy. For instance defenders are coached to keep their hands on the ball as long as possible during the tackle and that means that refs are faced with a tricky decision over and over as to whether they have delayed the PTB or not. Once the ref has shouted held, how long is the defender allowed to keep his hand on the ball or on the tackled player before the ref penalises him - 0.2 seconds, 0.4 seconds, 0.6 seconds etc? It's going to be a judgement call every time. that's why you end up with comments on every team's forum such as the one earlier on this thread saying "we never seem to get the 50-50 calls", because there are probably about 20 or 30 of these in every game and fans remember the ones that went against them.

Arundel..that's the one I was thinking of.

So when the defensive line moves yards offside before the ball clears the scrum your saying the ref can’t see it and can’t make the call, sorry I disagree and your 100% wrong about Craven, watch it again his right foot is always in front of the line, he’s offside and in the reference to decisions I never mentioned 50/50 calls all go against Fax.

Anyway and moving on.

Actually in case you missed it, the point I was making was very simple which clearly pointed out that “our” in house discipline would have to be in order for the York game as per the thread.
Namely if “we” stray even slightly offside and having given a number of penalties away when in possession last time out “we” would also have to be squeaky clean at the ptb or we would be heavily penalised again if “we” were not doing it right, it was all about us, how can that be classed as “relentless bagging of referees”?

On the bigger picture the ptb remains one of the main areas of the game where penalty calls in identical situations can go either way it’s just a fact.

The point here is, because of all the messing around clearly beyond 10th’s of a second, when watching live without the use of post game microscopic analysis and multiple replays to show whether it was the correct call or not (as per your Lockwood / Wood example) causes more frustration than almost anything else at almost every game (as it did at Featherstone that day) and consequently needs looking at.
You will never have perfection but after all it is a live sport which in that setting shouldn’t have these anomalies.

With that in mind rather than “bagging” the ref, the clubs, through disruptive ruck / ptb coaching and as a result producing these so called “smarter players” you mentioned were highlighted as part of the problem.

Trying to be proactive and positive a solution was proposed and an example of how it is currently working to a much higher standard in the NRL was provided as a model to follow.

Will it happen, very unlikely, why and this is the part I struggle with, the constant defensive denial approach and it’s all “bagging the ref” claim when’s there clearly are issues just fails to see the problem and fails to see the need for change.

Respectfully, I don't think you know the rules, do you? Craven is the marker. He doesn't have to be behind the line. If the play the ball is 12 inches from the line, as it was, and his foot is six inches from the line, he's onside. In any case, his left foot was behind the line (and his right foot in front of it) and my understanding is that would be classed as being behind the line even if he weren't the marker.

W t f come on fax

Cannot believe what I have just listened too. F+-k

That hurt massively but York turned up and we didn’t .

Oh well. York played the better game we a bit out of sorts I our attack and defence. Two massive gaping holes let York in for 2 trys. It has been a good season for us although get less fundings for losing tonight. Our lads and coaching staff and all concerned in running the club should be proud of what we have achieved this year

Bottom line is we didnt deliver tonight . Tactics need refreshing unfortunately . You just have to keep moving

We played how we were at the start of the season. Great season after that poor start, but we were pretty awful today. Unlucky in part, Lachlan's gift to them in the first half (he should probably have batted it dead for a drop-out), Adam getting the ball dislodged (fairly, imo), and hitting the post with the penalty, but with a pretty much full squad available, there's no way we should have lost today. Well done to York for coming up with a game-plan to disrupt us, but bad on us for not being able to react to that.