Naturally we are biased in favour of our players rather than the referee and his assistants - however - there are times where it is difficult to understand why a series of decisions are made.

As I recollect, in the middle of a match part-way through last season Kevin Sinfield had to ask the referee why Leeds were being penalised and then asked what was different that we did compared to the opposition - who were not being penalised. The same point was made by Brian McClennan in a couple of post-match interviews.

Incidentally, I thought that it was JJB who "knocked on" the ball in mid-air. A ball that came from a player in front of him and was caught by a player behind him - how can this be??

In the same match Brent Web "scored" and then had it disallowed for a very dubious offside call - the same situation being seen in many matches and never penalised - except for that one.

Referees make mistakes - far fewer than fans or certain commentators might believe - but they do make them. They also have to make calls on 50/50 situations where each set of fans will see them as 80/20s (in their club's favour) and I'm sure there are various 50/50s that fans of all clubs could point to where they'll claim they're hard done by.

There is too much focus of referees in general, and there are always certain referees that are 'assessed' differently by fans.

Referees are really annoying.
You spend the whole game complaining about their crap decisions & bias against your team only to get home, watch the game again on TV & see that they were right nearly all the time.
They generally make far fewer mistakes than the players.

The ball was lost forward (relative to the ground, not the player), not passed. It was not re-gathered by the same player who lost it forward, but by a team-mate before it hit the ground.

"If, after knocking-on accidentally, the player knocking-on regains or kicks the ball before it
touches the ground, a goal post, cross bar or an opponent, then play shall be allowed to proceed."

The player knocking-on did not regain the ball. Therefore it's a knock-on, not a forward pass and something on which the VR is perfectly entitled to adjudicate.

On the second point:

"Players of the side in possession other than the player taking part in the play-the-ball and the acting halfback must retire behind their players involved in the play-the-ball or to their own goal line."

The touchjudge that night had seen Brent Webb was in front of the play the ball at the time the ball was brought back into play. Webb subsequently touched the ball, meaning he was offside.

If you think you see that exact same situation occuring in "many matches" then I would suggest you try using both eyes to watch games in future, it may assist with your perception of depth and distance.

As offside calls go, that one was about the least dubious you will ever see. I'm sure I don't have to bring up the whole Lee Smith/Grand Final thing again if you want an example of what a dubious offside call looks like.

You beat me to it. IMO shocking decision. I've tried looking for what the offside rule actually says but haven't found one that says the players feet must be behind the ball. If someone can show me then I'll be happier to accept the call but it was still borderline.

There is an issue with consistency, most notably holding down at the PTB, but as has been mentioned the ref's make very few blatant mistakes. The amount of times I've got annoyed at the reffing when watching the game live, then gone home, seen it on tv and found that the ref was pretty much spot on. And has also been mentioned that any "close" decision is immediately classed as controversial especially when its live on TV.

The Lee Smith try in the grand Final is a perfect example. The VR gave a correct decision, yet simply because it was close people went crazy over it.

Happy to oblige

"A player is off side except when he is in his own ingoal if the ball touches, is touched, held or kicked, by
one of his own team behind him."

So for Lee Smith to be onside, Danny McGuire must not have been behind him. Level is onside.

The laws are not specific about body parts, but I would take it as being some part of the chasing player must be at least level with some part of the kicker. So if Smith's back foot is level with McGuire's kicking foot at the point McGuire strikes the ball, he's onside on that interpretation.

I can see what you're saying but whilst I can accept the argument the lack of clarity means that it could be interpreted differently and IMO other referees may well have given a different decision.

I try to think of myself as a reasonable person and my best gauge is would I accept it if that try was given against Leeds. I don't think I would in this case.

Just imagine this scenario. A PTB from a yard out. Wayne McDonald lies down and stretches out with his feet behind the dummy half. The dummyhalf kicks the ball straight to Wayne who touches it down. That is just as legal but IMO that player is clearly in front of the kicker. Do you think any ref would allow that try?

I would hope so yes, because unless its Francis Meli defending the kick the opposition should be able to catch the ball before it gets to McDonald laying on the floor

If we start allowing advantages because the opposition are crap referees (apart from Ganson) will have to review all their rational fordecision making.

It'd be a helluva stretch, he's currently in Dubai