Yes. Consistently one of the best referees.

As was shown by Silverwood today in the 31st minute (and affirmed by ex-referees boss Cummings) when a defender is returning the ball into the field of play and the ball touches the tryline while he is still in possession/contact, the correct ruling is ball grounded in goal - resulting in a goal-line drop out.

That wasn't the ruling the video referee at the Leeds - St Helens game came up with last week with the game coincidentally tied at 16 all - anyone remember who that ex-referee was?

Two in two weeks from the comfort of the TV gantry. Would any other sport ask its fans to put up with this level of apparent incompetence, from an official who doesn't appear to know all the rules?

The point was made by myself and Rogues Gallery last week that Ganson is on a hiding to nothing by exposing his inadequecies for the whole sport to see and would do himself a favour if he took himself out of the limelight and just concentrate on improving refereeing standards but alas that isn't Steve's way.

Another fantastic festival of rugby where the game is overshadowed by the incompetence of a certain Steve Ganson. Perhaps it's an illness?

Exactly. Ganson is simply an embarrassment to the good name of the sport. His questionable decisions on the field whilst as a referee .... his unsavoury antics off it,......and the cherry on the cake, was his performance as video ref at the weekend.

Way past time for the RFL to do a very deep and wide ranging Inquiry into Mr Steve Ganson.

The correct call should have been a penalty to HKR from where the ball was kicked - this would have given the Robbins a kickable penalty.

To say the outcome WOULD have been a draw is not entirely correct.

Poor decision, won't be the first and it won't be the last.

Move on.

Problem is it was more than a 'poor' decision.....even without the benefit of slow motion video replays it was bluddy obvious how far the offender was offside.
[iWith[/i the benefit of video replays it is utterly incomprehensible that the try was given (exacerbated hugely by the result and possible future ramifications of the final score).

The match should be replayed.

Penalty would have we're Green caught the ball, so doubt he would have kicked a 90 yard penalty.

No it wouldn't...

The penalty would have been where Green became offside, which is the moment he encroaches within the ten metres.

Quote: MattyLeeds "No it wouldn't...'" Pretty sure it would, being in front of a kicker isn't an offence, as soon as they get involved then the penalty is given from that position. Richard silver wood confirmed this on twitter https://mobile.twitter.com/SilversRef/tweets

Quote: MattyLeeds "No it wouldn't...'" Pretty sure it would, being in front of a kicker isn't an offence, as soon as they get involved then the penalty is given from that position. Richard silver wood confirmed this on twitter https://mobile.twitter.com/SilversRef/tweets

But only obvious if the referee in question understood the rule?

My suspicious is Ganson saw Green in front of the kicker (how could he not) and also saw that the kicker (Houghton) had not run past him to play him back onside (again how could he not) but because Green remained outside the ten metre zone between himself and the Hull player nearest to the ball as it bounced that he was then free to go for the ball. That's why I think Ganson gave the 'try' as I recall saying on the night of the incident or thereabouts earlier in this thread.

While the apology was always going to happen surely what's been missing is an explanation as to how the decision was made and what measures will be put in place in future to ensure it cannot happen again.

I liked and looked forward to Ganson's performances in the middle when viewing as a neutral - it added to the spectacle and the entertainment value, he had good banter with the players and loved to pass the buck (probably tongue in cheek) when he and his team of officials messed a call up. But the video referee has a slightly different role as he looks for millimeter precision if necessary especially on line decisions and offside at the kick is one such area where lines can be drawn and mistakes are demonstrable shown to be just that.



Why? Has that ever happened before when a referee has made a mistake and if not in the past is it a precedence (if that's the word and I'm asking the right fella to tell me if it's not) we want to be setting for the future.

tvoc - IIRC Ganson's explanation offered after the game is that he tracked the wrong runner and believed Chris Green had come from behind the kicker.

there's an interesting theory about this doing the rounds on our board. back in 2007 when cooke signed for rovers their first game with him was against sharpe's hudds live on sky. hudds spoiled rovers party and afterwards sharpe said something along the lines of i dedicate this victory to hull fc, once you play for them it never leaves you. he also was attributed with saying we have played some good teams this season - and hull kr as well. Don't know if 6 years on neil hudgell still holds a grudge against sharpe but i wouldn't be at all surprised, given his hatred of all things FC.

Thanks for that.

Hopefully Boots 'N All, Super League Show or such-like will attempt to reconstruct what Ganson did and let the fans see the complexity. Personally I don't recall there being any and still remain to be convinced that Ganson simply isn't across all the rules as he should be, as was in evidence last Monday when he awarded a St Helens try despite Hardaker grounding the ball in-goal first.

Perhaps on that occasion he was following the wrong ball?