I know but there was a video ref at the game and a good camera angle of what happened. refs are yuite happy to go to the screen to see if a kick is a 40-20 so in these instances where an allegation has been made then for me the VR should be consulted

James Child is an embyrionic Russell Smith.When he is awarded the really big and important games (for Leeds) we will win nothing.Look at what happened in the Russell Smith era (1 trophy ) as soon as he left for Oz we were winning left right and .Although he was soon found out in australia as a ref; now he has been demoted to a video ref and he cannot even get those decisions correct.Mark my words Child is worse IMO. But I hope I am proved wrong.

With Bentham being injured now, we had better get used to seein Mr Child more often.

This does happen, McDermott said last year that Stuart cummins approached the coaches saying "what do you want the game to look like?" with his response bring "you should be telling us that!"

Rugby League evolved from union to create a fast flowing spectator sport. If we start interrupting the game for every alleged infringement it'll end up like American Football where a 60 minute game takes 3 hours to get through.

The incident will be referred to Red Hall and the muppets there will deal with it.

So Leeds lack of trophies in the first 10 year of SL is solely down to Russell Smith?

Nothing to do with St Helens and Bradford having the better teams at the time?

Nurse, another 50 milligrams please......

A bit narrow minded from the Leeds coach there.

Two years back in the referees briefing packs pre season was a dictat that ANY laying on at the tackle was to be immediately penalized. It went as far as to say that if you heard the players counting you could presume they were deliberately laying on and blow up. The same pack deemed that as soon as a tackled players leg was lifted off the floor, the tackle was completed. And to call held.
The thinking was that this would speed up to PTB and clear up the ruck quicker.The coaches went nuts. Said that the referees were clearly out of touch with the game etc etc.
So if Cummins has asked the coaches what they do want, and they have nothing to say. . .

Okay 'critical' might be an over emotional remark.....I don't want to get into semantics. Even if it was only 50% a break like that does [iusually [/i result in a try from the next play the ball at least.

My main point was that Childs is the worst referee for breaking up continuity and flow with an over zealous use of his whistle.

However, again let me stress again Leeds did not deserve to win. Hull were a far superior looking side with a game plan and clinical execution. I loved the way they dominated down the middle and then ruthlessly stretched Leeds's sliding defence by spreading the ball at the right time. As others have stated Leeds depend too much on off the cuff individual brilliance and have done for a long time now.

If I was a Hull FC fan I would have been very proud of that performance and would hope they can repeat that consistentlynot continue to resist making some good young uns on the fringes (Ward, Singleton, D.Smith, Hood etc) more regularly selected. They should be an integral part of the first team already IMO. Without a doubt [iour[/i ageing pack is an area of concern.

Quote: Wellsy13 "He passes the ball on the 10m line and it is received about 3m in front. It definitely travelled forward.'" Since when has pitch markings had anything to do with judging the direction of a pass? Quote: Wellsy13 "I think you misunderstand what the momentum rule is. It has nothing to do with how fast the player travels after the pass (like Stevo seems to think), so Crooks challenging Webb is irrelevant. The ball travels in the forward direction faster than Webb was moving, therefore it should have been disallowed.'" This - www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg - it's a Union film but the reasoning equally applies in League - is why using pitch markings misses the point. Webb stayed in line with the pass even after Crooks' intervention. He would have stayed ahead of the ball without it. The pass was released either flat or backwards making it legal. Camera angles, unless precisely in-line, are deceptive.

Quote: Wellsy13 "He passes the ball on the 10m line and it is received about 3m in front. It definitely travelled forward.'" Since when has pitch markings had anything to do with judging the direction of a pass? Quote: Wellsy13 "I think you misunderstand what the momentum rule is. It has nothing to do with how fast the player travels after the pass (like Stevo seems to think), so Crooks challenging Webb is irrelevant. The ball travels in the forward direction faster than Webb was moving, therefore it should have been disallowed.'" This - www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg - it's a Union film but the reasoning equally applies in League - is why using pitch markings misses the point. Webb stayed in line with the pass even after Crooks' intervention. He would have stayed ahead of the ball without it. The pass was released either flat or backwards making it legal. Camera angles, unless precisely in-line, are deceptive.

Beat me to picking up on this one! One eyed or what?

Almost as good as the poster who said "had the referee been better, Leeds may have gotten an undeserved win." How does that work?!

Oh, and for the love of God, can people start saying his name right!

[sizeJames Child[/size
Not "Childs".

On a thread of people complaining about how much someone gets something wrong, you'd think the same people would be able to get his name right!

Ah but does he deserve [ithat[/i respect ?