And it's an opinion you are entitled to hold.

What about the pass to Delaney now, is it still in line with where Sinfield released it as you stated on here the other day?

Can they not appoint one person with the sole job of video reffing every game? I'm not aware of an occasion where two games using video refs in England were being played at the same time. At least that way there would (or perhaps should would be more appropriate....) be a lot more consistency. With a different person being video ref every week we're bound to get inconsistency down to one person interpreting something differently to the next person.

That's a hobby-horse of mine, I've been asking the same question for the last few seasons.

The ideal appointment IMO would be Ian Smith. I rarely find his decisions anything but correct when he's in the role and that isn't a situation I find with any of the others on a consistent basis.

Of course Smith is also one of the 'magnificent seven' so it's unlikely to get off the ground until he's ready to hang up his whistle.

The other day delaney was level, but since then, he's decided to alter his position to about half a metre in front of sinfield.

well if you keep looking maybe you will get the right answer? he is (you are) moving in the right direction

It's an improvement I suppose but you've still a way to go.

IMO of course.

Perhaps in another couple of days you'll see McGuire scoring the disallowed try.

mcguires no try might have been a 50/50 but he deserved to have it awarded just for his effort
theres very few players that would have even had the awareness to even attempt to ground from his position

You're sounding like Phil Clarke.

He deserves a try 'only' if he got the ball down within the rules. I think he did.

Just going back to Origin and the NRL in general - the cry from fans over here was that the dual referee system would speed up the play the ball and make the Australian game much faster than SL, giving them an even bigger advantage.

Based on what I've seen on MSK since it went free to air the NRL doesn't actually seem that much quicker in terms of clearing the tackle area than SL - anyone elses thoughts on whether it has actually made a difference?

When they were looking at that decision I actually joked that it wouldn't suprise me if they tried to find a reason to give the try, I didn't really think for one minute that he would actually allow it.

I just dont understand how there can be so many contentious decisions. Take the Mcguire try, some so they believe it to be a clear try, some dont, but surely with the incorporation of 'benefit of the doubt', these 50/50 decisions should be going to the attacking team. But I don't want to get hung up on that one try, because this isn't about a Leeds try being disallowed, it's more the fact that some of the decisions that are given are absolutely baffling.

With regards to the NRL, I think it looks slower, however if you count the seconds between contact and the ball being played, it's usually around 4 or 5 seconds. Count superleague and you are lucky if it is less than 8 seconds. The muppets on sky said the other week that ours was actually faster, and that may be the case from hitting the floor to the ball being played (I've not counted them), but certainly not from the initial contact. The main difference between superleague and the NRL is the line speed in defence. As soon as the ball is played, the defence are in the attackers face, this makes the play the ball look slower as the attack dont often get much room to move. This may be why we are struggling to catch the Aussies, they dont particularly play any awesome moves, they just batter teams with consistant, error free rugby, playing for position before finding a weakness. Watch the NRL games and have a look at the usual completion rates, I have seen numerous that have got to 25 mins without either team making a mistake, and likewise without making a break, they just play fairly boring, but hard and fast rugby until one team wilts under the pressure.

That's my two penneth anyway!

Give it to Karl Kirkpatrick, he couldn't/wouldn't go full time because of his job but surely he could do this if the money was right.

I'm sure he's man enough to recognise what's best for the game.

No really..

I'd have thought with fulltime refs there'd be plenty of time each week to get together with the video of each game and go through the decisions, which would allow them to be consistent.

No evidence of it on the pitch though

How many 'full time' referees are there supposed to be in Super League this season?

Seven?

So why did Ben Thaler have to officiate at both the Salford - Warrington game and the Harlequins - Crusaders game and Ian Smith likewise the Leeds - Wakefield game and the Hull KR V Les Catalans game over round 16.

Where were Steve Ganson and Richard Silverwood (Jamie Leahy and Gareth Hewer.)