i haven't received mine in the post yet, but I will do.

The final decision is the refs, as the touch judges are only supposed to indicate something if the ref asks. In reality it doesn't work like that though, and the ref should take the TJs view as he is best placed to give that decision.

Well I am pretty sure he didn't point ot the 20, and pointed between the sticks instead, but I am not sure he had his arm up, if that makes a difference.

Either way, he was incorrectly over ruled. And of more point to any debate of who's call it is, the touch judge definately had the best view of all the officials.

According to Thalersince he 'knew' this not to be the case [/ithe evidence of the touch judge was therefore unreliable and had to be disregarded .
Therefore: he fell back to the in goal judge who agreed with him that it had been grounded and said it was a try.

There is a certain logic to that - except the in goal judge turned out to be wrong.

C'est la vie, it just made Leeds have to earn the win a little more, which is a good thing in these times of plodding through regular seasons without really trying

Now let there be no more slagging off of our pet referee

This, and as you correctly mention kicks at goal, is the only time he does not have final decision!!!

Now, if you are arguing that Thaler gave the try as he, as the ref, clearly felt he grounded the ball and therefore it was not actual a touch in-goal call then I agree... but his touch judge also disagreed with that!!!

Mr Armadillo, you are missing someting,you are right that the TJ rules if the ball has gone out of play and he waved his flag to indicate that

the issue was if the ball was grounded before that, the referee rules on tries and did so as he had the opinion it had been grounded before that (probably with the help of the ingoal judge - i think the term in goal shows what he is there for and what he is there to assist/rule on)

it is common for a TJ to raise the flag to indicate the ball or player are in touch but a preceding incident in the field of play mean the referee awards a decision based on that, its not overruling the TJ in those incidents or this one

No, I am not missing this at all and yours is a very valid argument and I did make it myself already in my other posts.

If he says he clearly saw the ball being grounded BEFORE entering touch in-goal then to be fair he should have just ruled that BUT people are reporting he consulted the in-goal judge before awarding the try and didn't speak to the touch judge at all! MjM reports that he asked the in-goal touch judge for confirmation of the location of the touch-down, not actually whether he agreed with him because he signalled (by standing still) that it was a try in his opinion. As I said, surprise, surprise... that is what I would have said if I was him as well!

The things is, we are getting into detailed technicalities and strict literal definitions of the wordings of the laws. Thaler's mistake IMO was not to actual bring both the touch judge & in-goal judge together, have a chat and then make a ruling.

Of course, it doesn't help that we all seem to agree that the touch judge appears to be right and that Thaler (and the in-goal judge) appear to be wrong.

it was still a crap wrong decision no matter what bull he comes out with

Watching it back on the iplayer, the only person that thought it was a try was Ben Thaler.

and in the goal judge


dont forget him

shall we not mention smiths forward pass later in the game and his look round to see if anyone else picked it up then
ya know the one we scored from

The difference is, we touched the ball to score

its a slight difference

one which according to Thaler you dont need to score a try

I guess what I'm saying is your right