When Bennie westwood 'knocked on' when supporting a break, Ratchford kicked the ball on, picked up and was in the act of scoring when the referee called it back. Im pretty certain that if you drew lines across the pitch like they did with the Briers non-knock-on, that ball would be shown to have landed behind where it hit Westwoods hands. I think if Silverwood had allowed the VR to make the decision it probably would have been a try. However IMO if you lose possession and its anything like a 50/50 call then it should be called a knock on. You have made a mistake and so should be punished. Briers should have been penalised for his loss of possession and I think justice was done in the Westwood, Ratchford play. I think the decisions would be much clearer cut if the rule was about losing possession rather than knocking the ball forward.

Wouldn't it be easier to just rule that it's a knock on if it goes forward and not if it doesn't?

As a ref, in games with no video, you're basically screwed if you have to try and rule on the direction a player's hands are pointing at full speed every time the ball comes loose. Direction of travel of the ball won't always be easy to see from all angles, but it's a lot easier than direction of hands!

Not really screwed as players tend to be moving towards their opponents try line most of the time, any fumble when doing so will likely as not follow in the same direction after contact with said player. It shouldn't be difficult to judge the direction the player was travelling and rule knock-ons consistently on that basis.

especially if TJs are given more responsability and actually 'assist' the ref who is unable to give such decisions because of the speed of play and his positioning etc ?

I think thats for forward passes, rather than knock ons

I don't see anything in that passage that can be applied to forward passes.

There is no movement of a player after contact with the ball that can negate a knock on. If the player is moving towards the opposition line when he touches the ball (without also catching it before it hits the ground or an opposing player) it's almost certain to be a knock on, albeit not certain to be given as one.

In commentary they will often remark 'but it's gone backwards, he's got that one wrong' when in actual fact he's made the correct call as it's the player's forward momentum that has overtaken the ball.

I think you're over analysing it. Surely a knock on is only a knock on if it goes forward. If its about imparting some forward momentum on a ball even if it continues in a backwards direction than any time the ball hits the floor its a knock on, even if it lands 5m behind the 'offending' player

That's how I understand it. From a players touch if that balls moves forward, regardless of previous motion, it's a knock-on. Sounds right to me.

Correct they basically are also potential knock ons. A player moving forward towards the opposition's goal-line upon touching a ball in flight with any part of either arm (from shoulder to finger-tip) are liable to be called a knock on unless they regain the ball before it touches the floor or touches an opposing player - hence the desperate attempt (before he slipped) by Briers on Saturday to try to regain possession) knowing he was liable to be adjudged to have knocked on. Irrespective of which direction the ball was heading - he knew because he was facing the Leeds line and thrusting his hands forward he'd be pinged - except on this occassion, as happens in every game every week and probably to every team every week, he got a slice of good fortune.

Had Briers been turned side on or with his back to the Leeds line (I know that's an unlikely scenario in this particlar instance but just as an example) he wouldn't have looked to have knocked on providing the ball ended as it did closer to the Warrington line and wouldn't have expected to get pinged. In that case he'd have probably calmly retreated, collected the ball or let a closer colleague do so and played on without expecting the referee's whistle.

It would never have been given as a 'knock on' in Union
League is just too pedantic with 'knock ons' and should continue to let more go to speed up the game.

A 20 page thread for a ref's call that was correct and wouldn't have had an effect on the game even if he'd have given it the other way