You say your better half said she thought he must have pressed the wrong button. She was on the right track, but I think it was more a case of, eeny meeny miny, MOE!

Agreed. They use this on Premier Sports too for Championship games, I think it's a really good addition to know what they look for and reasons why for making the decisions they do. Also noticed on Premier Sports during the Hunslet-Batley game they questioned the video ref several times during the game about decisions that weren't referred to the video ref. A second opinion and explanation on questionable decisions was good to hear. This is something SKY should really consider doing IMO.

Steve Ganson should resign immediately, I know I would in his position, if he doesn't he should be fired.

He didn't have a brain explosion, he wasn't suffering from fatigue - good grief Phil Clarke is there no bottom to that barrel you keep scraping - even Stuart Cummings didn't use that excuse. He didn't hit the wrong button and was too proud to admit it - showing a replay of the touchdown immediately prior to awading the 'TRY' indicates that he was satisfied with everything prior to that. He didn't ignore the technology - thanks Stevo now go back to sleep.

_____

The explanation for what happened appears much, much simpler - (ignoring corruption) Ganson doesn't understand all the rules. That should make his current position untenable but it didn't effect his ability to officiate in the past - sadly.

So why did he ask to see the grounding?

Even as the decision was made why didn`t Thaler say something to Ganson to look at it again. He could then have revered the decison. So Thaler is as much to blame IMO .Either that or change the rules for the on field ref to make the decsion after advice from the VR.

You do realise that's how this is going to go down - somehow it'll end up being all Thaler's fault. Ganson used to do it all the time when he was in the middle - often when questioned by players after he'd made a mistake he'd explain 'it was the touch judge's decision' - I don't know know how he managed to keep a straight face sometimes.

No need to change the rules - it's a Ganson problem not a video referee problem - the solution is much simpler.

For once his incompetence is not a matter of opinion - just a plain fact for all to see. What a time to prove it though! The Dunning-Kruger effect applies - he has no idea he is incompetent but the rest of us are now totally convinced and have undeniable proof. He must go!

Are you really suggesting a man should lose his job over this ? seems a bit extreme .

I am sure he doesn't stand to gain anything financially or otherwise from this , yet players knowingly involved in betting scandals and drug taking scandals have been allowed to continue to draw a living from RL , yet a bloke makes a mistake and you want to end his career . Bizarre .

He is the boss of referees. If he can't get a simple call like that right what does it show to people he's in charge of?!

Thank heavens! He is off duty this afternoon and his place is taken by Ian Smith who will, no doubt, be peeing himself.

Smith will do alright, he does it every week for Premier Sport

I confess I have not yet seen the incident...but it does appear to be inexcusable.

If the replays had been done the BBC way, with full explanatory commentary, it would have been interesting to hear his explanation (s) for his decision.

I beg to differ.I don't think Smith is the answer.Anyhow I thought I had landed on the Wigan Warriors forum with the over reaction of some of the posters on here.Ganson made an error he's human, get over it. After Millenium Tragic the dulls got all the 50/50 decisions in the rematch I'm sure the same will happen with Hull KR.

Ok - nobody died, but an over-reaction? I don't think so. The competency of the refs in our great game has been an issue for some time. Ganson has just made one too many errors, at a showcase event, and it was a whopper! If it had not impacted on the result these 6 pages might be an over-reaction, but the outcome is an unfair result and, as such, must lead to questions about the capability of someone who puts himself in the limelight as an exemplar and leader but cannot get a simple judgement right, and not for the first time. The fact that this time he was using the best of technological support, and still could not get it right, means that this event needs to be addressed appropriately and that does not mean ignoring it or sweeping it under the carpet. (And YES - I would have said the same about Tanseygate if he had referred it to an equally incompetent vidoe ref. We put up with realtime errors from the ref on the spot all the time)