You also had a 10-4 penalty count up to that point. I guess that is just forgotten about isn't it?

Like I said it was a bad call with the Walsh and McGilvary situation, where probably the Ferres incident would never have happened. It was a bad call for the drop goal.

But don't hide behind saying everything was against.

Yes we had a 10 - 4 penalty count, but I'm pretty sure that was 10 penalties to Saints!!!!!!!

I can't believe anyone is criticising the sending off decision. If other refs have put a similar tackle on report (to be honest I haven't seen many like it outside pro wrestling) then they were wrong and their lead shouldn't be followed in the name of consistency.

Hudds will feel aggrieved by the drop goal. But it's an error. People make them. To suggest it's bias is just foil-hatted rambling.

The sending off was not 50/50, clear red. While I don't think a lot of this particular ref as others have said least he had the bottle to make the decision I bet a few would have put it on report.
Bad tackle and bad timing, should get a fair few games for that

Straight red and Ferres to take over the undertaker at wrestlemania. Well executed piledriver If You ask me this is RL not WWE.

It was 10-4 against Huddersfield mate.

Ferres was a clear red and I am glad Bentham made the call. I thought Bentham was having a good game but the Walsh McGilvary call was, as you say, dreadfully wrong. That really benefitted Saints in the momentum of the game.

The drop goal was 50/50 but he should have gone to the VR, having over-used it during the game. If he needs the VR to help him decide that a plyer is tackled in the air then use it for that. Like Him says, the VR may not have been conclusive in any event.

Huddersfield can blame Ferres and Brough's terrible kicking for that loss.

No, it is not standard procedure at all and no one has ever known it happen before... so not standard. I have it on very good authority that Ganson gave Roby one almighty bollocking at Wakefield from one of the Wakefield staff members. They could not hear exactly what was being said, but they could head Ganson shouting from in the corridor outside the ref's room! Equally, I think it is difficult to argue that Roby's performance, while I don't believe corrupt or biased, was sub-standard & advantaged Saints on the day because you had two players subsequently suspended following the game that both should have been red card incidents.

Quote: Inflatable_Armadillo "No, it is not standard procedure at all and no one has ever known it happen before... so not standard. I have it on very good authority that Ganson gave Roby one almighty bollocking at Wakefield from one of the Wakefield staff members. They could not hear exactly what was being said, but they could head Ganson shouting from in the corridor outside the ref's room! Equally, I think it is difficult to argue that Roby's performance, while I don't believe corrupt or biased, was sub-standard & advantaged Saints on the day because you had two players subsequently suspended following the game that both should have been red card incidents.'" Yes it is standard procedure and it happens regularly. The referees have a coach for the game, in this case Ganson. The referee coach discusses the performance with the referee at half time, as the team coaches do. To say nobody has ever known it happen before simply isn't true, I asked somebody I know who would know about these sort of things and they confirmed that it's nothing new at all and a regular occurence. Agar may not have been aware of it and Ganson may have rightly or wrongly shouted at Roby, either way it's a non event and completely blown out of proportion by ignorant comments by Agar. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... om-actions

Quote: Inflatable_Armadillo "No, it is not standard procedure at all and no one has ever known it happen before... so not standard. I have it on very good authority that Ganson gave Roby one almighty bollocking at Wakefield from one of the Wakefield staff members. They could not hear exactly what was being said, but they could head Ganson shouting from in the corridor outside the ref's room! Equally, I think it is difficult to argue that Roby's performance, while I don't believe corrupt or biased, was sub-standard & advantaged Saints on the day because you had two players subsequently suspended following the game that both should have been red card incidents.'" Yes it is standard procedure and it happens regularly. The referees have a coach for the game, in this case Ganson. The referee coach discusses the performance with the referee at half time, as the team coaches do. To say nobody has ever known it happen before simply isn't true, I asked somebody I know who would know about these sort of things and they confirmed that it's nothing new at all and a regular occurence. Agar may not have been aware of it and Ganson may have rightly or wrongly shouted at Roby, either way it's a non event and completely blown out of proportion by ignorant comments by Agar. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... om-actions

Honestly thought that Rugby League fans were knowledgeable,,then this comes up......ah well.!!!!!

They gave the penalty to Walsh for Mcgilvray lying on too long. Ref spoke to the linesman who says Jermaine would not get off Walsh to allow him play the ball as it was a half break and Saints where on the front foot. Correct decision.

the refereeing is ruining the game of rugby league.
ive thought rugby is corrupt since i went to a game in 1992 wakefield v leeds.
wakefield were 20-0 down at half time , they came out for the second half and got everything ,they won 22-20,
only to find out the ref lived on pinders heath and all is windows were covered with wakey stickers ,

To say that the Ferres 'pile-driver' was 50/50...????

Really..????

Straight red any day of the week.

As for the Brough drop goal, from the camera behind the sticks it looked through, but from the camera facing the sticks it looked suspect. Can a ref go to the screen from a drop goal? I've never known it happen before and was wandering why.

I think he can, as they sometimes go to check how the game should be re-started after the balls gone dead in-goal. This must surely mean that the video ref has the right to give a drop goal. A further question is, can he give a drop goal as 'benefit of the doubt'?

And yes, a definite straight red card for Ferres. An awful tackle.

That provision is in there to state that a kick can't go too far over, i.e it isnt disallowed because it went so high that it went above the space between the posts rather than above it. It isnt there so that ref or VR can speculate would happen in terms of ricochets etc. Above the posts is a drop goal.

The Walsh McGilveray situation, Walsh lost the ball, McGilveray went for it. Walsh covered this up by attacking McGilveray and forcing the ref to make a decision. Bentham bought it. He wasnt giving that decision until Walsh's reaction. Bentham got done by a pro.

Ferres deserved a red, no arguments whatsoever, but about 30secs before that Turner passed the ball off the floor and it should have been a pen to Hudds.

Saints certainly got the rub of the green from the ref. Its not biased, or corrupt or anything like that, they just had one of those days when a couple of decisions went for them that probably shouldnt have, and in a close game that makes a big difference. All teams have them

Fully agree.

If the ref was in a clear position to see the drop goal then he didn't need a second opinion. Brough turned away and didn't fully follow the flight of the drop kick so he could not say for certain. The two TV views were contradictory so going to the VT ref would not have helped. If the ball went exactly over one post then IMO it should be no goal as had the post been higher it would have bounced back.