Not being high and mighty - I am telling you what the ruling is. Merely informing, educating, helping you. Teaching, if you like.

Let's try it this way...

Wire in possession, wire drop the ball - at this point, play on - Leeds (KL) knock the ball forward also, removing the possibility of playing on further - the play is dead. The last team to have possession is Wire.

Anything happening after that point is "out of play" - hence Leeds were never in possession and were never the attacking team - correct VR ruling is scrum defence.

Does that help?

I understand what happened.

I understand what the ruling was.

I'm also pretty sure that the precedent is that the team potentially scoring are viewed as the attacking team as per the Cas v Leeds game earlier this year

I don't know that incident and we would need to review it properly to see what actually happened.

It doesn't change the fact that the terminology, however confusing, was correct at Wembley.

It probably wont be an issue in the future.

Go have a look then, and I think you'll find you're wrong and that in video referee decisions the team potentially scoring are always referred to as the attacking team.

You are, therefore, suggesting that there was an error in your game v Cas, because the decision at Wembley was correct.

If your optician tells you that you need glasses, do you steadfastly refuse to believe him too, despite all the evidence?

I am simply trying to help you see...

What do you do for a living?

The decision was correct. In a manner of speaking you are correct in what you are tyring to say however in the history of video refereeing the team potentially scoring have always been the attacking team.

Yep, I wear contact lenses instead.

I'm a teacher, you? Not that I'm sure what it adds to the discussion.

So if you, from that position of knowledge, told me that Bloom's Taxonomy was used to underpin the foundations of pedagogy, I would listen to you.

I said I'm a teacher. Not a student of learning or education. I wouldn't even try!

Are you trying to tell me you're a Super League referee?

The video ref when asked to judge if a try had been scored or not had to go back to the tackle on Hodgson.Now in that tackle Hodgson was judged to have knocked the ball forward in the tackle.Then KL knocked the ball on himself imiterial of Delaney being offside.The first offence was by hodgson knocking the ball on so Leeds head and feed.

How did you achieve a teaching degree without an understanding of how people learn???

When deciding who is attack/defence, the VR is looking at the status of the play, at the point that play can no longer develop legally i.e. is dead.

In this instance, Wire knock-on (play on), Leeds knock-on (play is dead) - Wire = attack, Leeds = defence.

Delaney becomes involved AFTER the play is dead and his actions have no bearing on the attack/defence terminology.

Even Silverwood needed clarification, as he didn't know what the VR was actually seeing.

You should see the terminology changed to reflect the team's name shortly in the future, to avoid further confusion.

I'll have the Castleford game archived on Doovde but not that easy to search through however I do have several games on the old Sky+ box and the first one I found to quickly scan has a strikingly similar incident to the one under discussion here.

Leeds playing from right to left in relation to the main camera position. A kick through by Leeds into the opposition's twenty metre zone. A kick return by an opposing back running out of his own left field. A big legal hit by the kick chase team causing the ball carrier to spill possession. A Leeds knock forward by one player, the ball picked up by another stood in front in a now offside position who picks up runs to the line and scores.

Without splitting too many hairs it couldn't really be any more perfect an example to reference yesterday's ruling against for video referee on-screen terminology consistency.

Put me out of my misery then!!!

Good thread this.

Briers didn't knock on. Briers also obstructed Hall and correctly got penalised. Leuluai did knock on, and it was correctly a scrum to the defending team.

Lovely stuff.

Yes, as does having the video referee coming from Warrington itself ....

See also Russell "Penalty try, Russell ... Your call" Smith