Imagine all the trophies we'd win if every single referee wasn't biased against Leeds.....

One thing that has always irked me a bit on the reffing side is why when going to the VR for try/no try it isn't automatically checked that the defending team are onside, because if they're not then that's always the first offence. I'd bet that every try disallowed by VR's from within the ten should have resulted in a penalty to the attacking team because of offside, but that none of them have. It's a small thing, but what's the point in having a ref shout 'on the line' if when every player ignores it it has no consequences?

Especially if you're going to disallow tries for an attacking player being offside at the play the ball.

Rugby League supporters are and always have been obsessed by referees. I think it blights their enjoyment of the game.
Silverwood made some errors (should have waited before blowing up for Farrell's professional foul and it ought to have been a penalty try, IMO). However, I bet if you count his errors they are dwarfed by the errors that the players make.

I don't think anyone expects referees to be perfect. What they expect them to be is competent and consistent, within reasonable parameters.

Certainly within a game, if you're going to be loose/tight on a particular offence then do it for the full 80. It's things like giving team warnings for a sequence of similar offences, then basically turning a blind eye to it that annoys fans. After Wigan were put on the team warning for high tackles, there were a couple of shots that came up off the chest/shoulder into the neck area that went unpenalised. These weren't any different to some of the offences that had brought about the team warning in the first place. That's the kind of thing that irritates fans, and it happens too often to be a coincidence.

Still, at least we've not reached the standards of football referees and started sending off the wrong players.

I don't have any expectations. They're simply not my focus. Occasionally at the game I might get agitated and wound up by a decision but usually I'm the one who is wrong. For example, at the game I was baffled and annoyed that they chalked off Moon's try. Watching back, it was obviously the right call.

Stuff like that is understandable though. No way the spectator in the stand is going to spot that, because you're not focused on where everyone is at the moment the ball is played. At the game, you're not getting the audio so you don't know exactly what it is the VR has been told to look for. 100% the right call by the officials working well together.

Nobody goes to the game to watch the officials, but that doesn't mean you can't look back after the game and comment on whether they did well, poorly or otherwise with any justification in the same way people analyse the performance of players.

You're talking like an idiot. Seems because you are a referee you think that your opinion carries more clout than a non referee, sorry to pee on your bonfire, but it doesn't, it's just another opinion. Let me ask you a couple of questions,
A; how often in a game do you see an offence being committed and choose to ignore it? Are you not cheating the fairer players by allowing law breakers to continually break the laws of the game, while the fairer players play at a disadvantage.
B; is your job as a referee to enforce the rules of the game without question ?
C; as a longstanding ref, have you changed your style of reffing because you are not brave enough to apply the rules as written in the rule book, simply because you want to fit the image of a modern ref that seeks a faster game.
I'll be interested to see your answers, but would class you as a weak person if you have changed your reffing style or enforcement of the laws just to fit in with the RFL's modern stereotype. How many governing bodies would order their referees to ignore offences such as a forward pass when everybody has clearly seen it? Absolutely unbelievable.

Any ref that says "speed it up in the ruck Sean, I've let four or five go", or as Thaler said a handful of times on Thursday when players lurched forward off the mark trying to win a penalty, "no,no, you're moving forward," is a cheat, simple as that. See an offence, penalise it. If you don't you are cheating the fairer players who play by the book.

Great, games with 100 penalties awarded throughout......I'd love to watch that.

Refs have to find the right balance between penalising stuff and trying to let the game flow.

You make it sound so very black and white. A ref warns a player about something "clearly then if he's done something wrong it's a penalty and he's cheated by not giving it!".......reffing a game isn't as simplistic as that and if the game was reffed how you're suggesting it should be it'd be an awful spectacle.

first of all, I simply pointed out refs in RL are poor in applying advantage.

secondly would you like a game where every single infringement is penalised? if so it would be a bloody awful game whatever the sport.

thirdly, I referee football. I have reffed league and premiership clubs. in football the laws are a guide. lots start " if in the referee's opinion". I wouldn't know how the RL ones are written but I suspect neither do you.

I would also argue no referee would ignore something as blatant as a forward pass. anyone who thinks they do is deluded.silverwood had a decent game on Friday. the two points I would take issue with is issueing a team warning the not following it up after a few high tackles.
also he could, and should, have waited to see where the ball ended up after Watkins flick. chelsea scored a great first goal today after a great advantage from the referee.

lastly this is a board for debate, if you have to resort to having pops and calling people idiots because you don't agree with them I suggest you grow up and get to bed. it's school tomorrow

Spot on Tad. I also think Silverwood had a decent game but not allowing Leeds advantage was very very poor as it could easily have changed the game (and in my opinion it probably did). He also needed to be a bit more contrite when explaining it to leeds players. Just saying "I'd blown the whistle" with a smile isn't good enough.

The Union refs are much better at that kind of thing in my opinion.

Anyone remember the "zero tolerance" experiment the RFL ran a few years ago? Think it was a game reffed by Karl Kirkpatrick.

Every single offence spotted was penalised. There were something like 20-odd penalties in the first half, and about ten in the second. By all accounts, a frustrating nightmare to watch and play in.

If you want to drive League to being much more like Union, then penalise every tiny infraction of the rules that you see.

I remember a few years back when the season opened with the Magic weekend at Cardiff and Wakey played Cas with James Child as referee and he managed to award around 40 penalties in what wasn't even a dirty game. Think he had a few more games around that time when the penalty count in his games were really high, and most of the time for no apparent reason.

That actually wasn't a bad year, as the experiment worked to a degree. After about 8 rounds, all clubs seriously cleaned up their act for rest of season. Certainly there is a lot more "professional" offences happening in recent years, as refs have shown more leniency.

I always feel that James Child is trying to impress the referees boss with his repertoire of penalties (offside at the kick off,or striking in the scrum etc).Ultimately there's usually too many penalties in his matches which detracts from the spectacle.Not a fan of him at all,his matches seem to be the ones that are in danger of boiling over.

Evening Tad, I think you may have to do some back tracking re the "idiot" issue, I was merely responding in kind to you calling me an idiot earlier in this debate. You may also have to do a bit of back tracking with your"deluded" jibe at me. If you hadn't noticed, video referees have been ordered to ignore any forward passes when a try is sent upstairs to them. They can penalise offside, obstruction, knock on, etc, etc etc, but have been told they must ignore the Rugby League law regarding a forward pass, so there you go. I am happy to debate with you on your terms Tad, call me an idiot, I'm more than happy to reciprocate, I"ll store my "deluded" jibe for use in a later debate

I don't think refs cheat all the time, but they do ignore clear infringements that should be penalised. I'm from the Rudolf Guiliani school of thinking, broken windows theory or "zero tolerance". Human beings by nature take advantage of any weakness, give then an inch, you know the rest. If it takes every offence to be punished in order to restore any semblance of compliance on the field, then so be it. Just how far do you think Dom Manfredi would have moved off the mark before Silverwood pinged him, he was already in the bar at the Bridge Inn at Kirkstall. It's human nature, let them move a yard forward, they'll want two, let them stand two yards offside, they'll want three. The reason why so many pages are spent debating ref issues is down to the RFL and the refs themselves. I watched a DVD of the '72 championship Final the other day, nobody lurching forward at the play the ball, nobody encroaching offside, nobody layed on top of a tackled player whilst turning round looking at the ref waiting for him to shout "moooove ", just players playing the game controlled by a ref without an agenda. The RFL and refs are weak people, we need a Guiliani in control to restore order. Nigel Wood is a man of straw.

video refs have never been allowed to judge on forward passes due to camera angles

HTH

From limited experience of his refereeing, he came across as somewhat aloof, arrogant and incapable of working with the players to ensure a better game rather than being a stickler for detail. Not a great communicator in the way that say Ganson could be - when he wanted to.

I've just re-read Kev's 2003 diary and it's interesting because he talks about the officiating of Ganson and Silverwood. Nothing really seems to have changed in 12 years with Silverwood still giving highly questionable decisions against us.

There's always going to be room for interpretation and that adds somewhat to the sporting spectacle. But Kev said in 2003 that he worries that the standard of refereeing could drive fans away from the sport. Whilst I can't imagine people not buying a season ticket because of the officials, I've known of people not to attend certain matches because of who is taking charge.

Whilst mistakes will happen (we wouldn't want robots to officiate) there needs to be accountability for some of the glaringly bad calls. Until we have a strong pool of top refs, it won't happen. Its a real shame.

Although I'm sure you'd see less laying on at the ptb if James Child had armed police to do his bidding, I don't see the RFL adopting this approach any time soon



Then again, it would be a vast improvement on video refereeing.

Are you for real or are you just trolling?

If you penalised every offence you would not have a game - you may have a point if they clamped down then maybe there would be a greater observance of the rules but that is no guarantee. To take your Guillani point, he clamped down on the mafia - did it actually make a difference - no one iota. The mafia was still as prevalent all he way through his time in charge they, were just cleverer and that is what the players will do they all adapt.

One thing that has changed since 1972 is the decrease in out an out thuggery that littered the game in those days. The bias of the likes of Robin Whitfield makes Silverwood look like a saint by comparison. Yes you may have more yes sir no sir in those days but the referees weren't better for being jumped up draconian school teachers. You are comparing part time players and a spped of game that was pedestrian by comparison to todays speed of play.

The idea the any referee cheats is not worthy of comment.

I trust your wife - if you have one - enjoys her days in the dungeon - you seem a very bull-like character

I actually felt some sympathy for Manfredi on Friday.

Yes he stepped forward off the mark, but IIRC wasn't there a tackler right behind him and on the mark where the ball should have been played?

He was trying to play the ball quickly, couldn't because he had an opposition player directly behind him so stepped forward - almost doing the Leeds player a favour in the process by stopping him getting penalised for not clearing the ruck.

Certainly not the worst move off the mark I've seen this season, and probably not much different to plenty that will go unpenalised for the rest of the year

I reckon I have seen well over a thousand games. Never in all that time I have bothered to find out who the ref is, often I would be hard pressed to remember who the ref was after the game. It is so ludicrous as to be hilarious that someone who miss a game for such a reason.