Do others think that when a video ref is in attendance at a game, he should be more involved in decisions?

For example, in my view Carvell should have walked on Saturday and Morley should have been sin binned - this evidence was staring the video ref in the face and if allowed, he could have done something about it.

I believe that when a video ref is being used (as was the case on Saturday night), he should be able to advise the ref of anything as serious as the incident with Carvell and Jackson.

Had Carvell been dismissed, we would have at least benefited from his almost maiming one of our players, whereas if he does receive a ban, it will be Wigan who will be the beneficiaries. Warrington benefited from the disruption to our game plan by removing Jackson. Luckily he was able to come back on in the second half, but this may well have not been the case and the outcome would still have been the same for Warrington and Carvell.

I also believe if a video ref is being used, he should be better utilised and check every try (not just the one where the ref has a doubt), it has been shown on many occasions that refs miss a dropped ball or as was the case on Saturday, Briers being in an offside position for his interception.

Was Briers offside, not had chance to watch it all yet. He looked onside when i watched the replay on the screen

Totally. If an incident has happened off the ball or is worthy of going on report the video ref should be used as that could immediatly affect the game in the same way a try could

The thing is the ref could have seen the incidents both were on the big screen and it wasnt as if they couldnt have seen it i was at the WRE and could see both perfectly well. the video ref mentioned the Carvel incident to the ref but he just said hed leave it to the midweek panel, this i heard on the tv from a recording, a poor ref who was more out to make a name for himself rather than doing his job.

A good 5m, he should have also been penalised EVERY drop out where he kicked it a good 3 metres away from the goal line.

My thinking was if a player does get a 2 match ban, he should be banned for the next match and then serve his 2nd match ban in the returning fixture later on in the season so that team at least gains some benefit. If it is the 2nd fixture between the two, then the other team can select which match the opposition player should be banned for. That would make it interesting.

100% agree on this, and it would put us first in sport to do this. But the RFL arent proactive enough to make this happen, rule change through the season blah blah blah,

Re; Briers interception, feeling at the time was the whole team was offside, we got a really good quick play the ball and they were all on the back foot. Haven't had chance to see it on the TV yet though!

OK, just seen it on the Iplayer, as I suspected, the entire wire team were offside-no try....what a pile of crap that idiot Thaler is. Could he not have gone to the screen for that?

They will never do it after the f that was ganson gate at millenium magic for bradford vs leeds. Klien saying bradford were offside when they were clearly not, over ruling the decsion from ganson on the pitch resulting in the comedy of errors with the try being given.

I think that the video ref could be used more, with minimal interuption to play, but then again so could the touch judges. Just as the ref should consult his touch judges briefly before awarding a try, he should perhaps speak to the video ref to say...'is everything ok?'. Unless the video ref has an immediate absolute concern...try awarded! (Just to be clear, the video ref shouldn't go looking for things unless the ref on the pitch specifically asks for it.)

With the Carvell incident, Jackson was sparked out on the floor...so play had to be stopped anyway. It would not have interfered with play in the slightest for the video ref to be consulted at that point, for Thaler to ask...what happened there Ian?

Ideally, Ian Smith could then have taken a quick look at Carvell leading with the elbow as a 'reportable incident' and issued a 10 minute sin bin. A later decision could then be made by the disciplinary board after the game.

As it is the team offended against, receives absolutely no benefit/compensatory action from the disciplinary action of an apposing player after the game. Hence, they are in effect penalised during the game by the ref & Video ref not making a decision right there and then. Again a weak, and un-fair option! There must be a better way than what currently happens!!

Spot on Grobs!

Bizarrely, the Sky coverage showed Ben Thaler listening to something in his ear when Jackson was getting treated, the Sky commentary team assumed Carvell was on his way, but after Jackson was carried off, Thaler waved play on.

Bizarre given that Carvell has been banned, how did Ian Smith not tell Thaler is was at least a penalty to Cas, let alone a dismissable offence.

If Thaler was told about the incident by the video ref, then he's even worse than I thought (which is Sunday League standard), unless of course Smith didn't tell him it was as bad as everyone else in the ground and hundreds of thousands on TV bore witness to, in which case Smith should get the bullet.

Like you Gaz, I couldn't believe he didn't even give us a penalty for it or put it on report (OK I also think on report can be another cop out) It stinks that this guy, who hates the Tigers (don't know the reason he hates us, but I've heard a few theories) is selected to ref us, surely the RFL must be able to see how poor his performances are and how inconsistent he is with his decision making when he's in charge of our games?

It was a shocker by all four officials to miss the Carvell incident.

As ever, I watched the game again when I got home and it does look like Thaler is getting a word in his ear, so he keeps telling both side...wait...wait. Every viewer is then thinking...oh he's holding his ear piece for a reason, he must be getting feedback from the other officials etc...he's gona pull Carvell etc etc.

It is with absolute amazement that he then lets play continue without so much as a word to Carvell. If all four officials, who have masses of time to consider the event....take no action, yet a disciplinary board does afterwards to the extent of issuing a ban....then it just reeks of incompetence of the officials at the game.

It's even more laughable when you consider the penalty he gave against Hudson for the 'nothing of a push' so the Cas player could get up to play the ball. Yet not a word against Carvell for sparking a man out!! It's a joke.

Never mind all this tv talk about our grounds and ...the fans deserve better blah blah blah!!!! It's better officials that the whole of Superleague deserves.