yeah i see your point and i thought it should of been chalked off, but feel his pantomimes didnt help. but yeah, who actually knows which rules the refs will use week on week?

In my opinion the VR is a waste of time. Far from resolving controversial decisions it has heightened them. Until you get objective rather than subjective decisions made by infallible human beings (impossible) then what's the point?

except it wasn't obvious. took a slow motion replay to see it. can understand why it was missed.
and two wrongs don't make a right in most peoples worlds

We had an entirely objective obstruction rule, which was entirely reliant on where the player with the ball went in comparison to team-mates in front of him.

The chimps in the Sky commentary box complained about it. Fans who don't understand the game complained about it. Coaches complained about it, whenever it didn't work in their favour.

As a result, it got changed back to an interpretation entirely reliant on the referee making a subjective judgement. Sometimes as a sport we don't half shoot ourselves in the foot.

Obstruction or not, Cuthbertson had all the time in the world to tackle Wardle after the contact with Huby. He chose to throw his arms in the air and hope for a refs call which correctly did not come. If he had made the effort instead of claiming obstruction he could have tackle Wardle easy.

Sensible post from a Rhinos supporter.
Constructive without all the bellyaching from most of the dross on this forum, make no wonder all fans of other teams
chant we all hate Rhinos. In fact I don`t think we hate the Rhinos ( it`s the fans )

We should resort to antisemitism to bring us in line with other clubs in West Yorkshire.

I presume your opinion is based on stats, for me Crabtree for his size does not run his weight. For what it's worth I thought a draw was a fair result.
We did not do enough in the second half, neither did you in the first half. See you in the challenge cup.

you are correct. however when you say obstruction or not it was. huby stopped in the line and deliberately blocked cuthbertson. after that I agree he could have moved but the onus is on the attacker not to be where he was

the point of the obstruction rule is that players can be out of position to effect a tackle. if you honestly believe that huby played no part in that phase of play then i thnk you need to take of your hudds glasses and think about what your interpretation would of been had it been at other end of the field.

the ref is lucky it didnt with the way Brough was acting.....

He sometimes gives that impression but I think the truth lies closer to him not really hurting anyone when he does take the ball in. He can take some putting down - sometimes - but somehow never seems to take a right lot out of the defence. Bit like Kyle Amor.

That was never an obstruction in s month of Sundays. If Cuthbertson's antics had have succeeded in disallowing a try it would have been poor form. Cuthbertson was pishing about and should have attempted a tackle. Leeds fans who think Cuthbertson's antics should have worked, imagine Brough, Briers or some other "Villain" acting up that way. You'be be having a fit.

There were two or three times when Mulhern - a kid in prop terms - took him down one on one.

He seems to have lost a yard of pace which means he's taking a lot less momentum into collision.