I haven't seen us doing anything that other teams aren't doing. We wrestle a little more and then get off the player a bit quicker. I haven't actually heard another coach criticise Leeds for slowing down the PTB (maybe I've missed it?), but I've heard plenty of coaches bagging other teams for this on several occasions.

Whether he's motionless or not if the player with the ball runs behind him and he blocks the progress of defensive players to the ball carrier then he is interfering and penalised.

I'd agree with that 100% if it wasn't for the fact Leeds defenders had already tackled the ball carrier 2-3 yards behind the alledged obstruction. Usually you just play on as no advantage has been gained by the attacking side. I thought that was a penalty for nothing to even up the count. Just my opinion though, as I can't read Gansons mind (nor would I want to ).

I dont have a problem with 50 -50 calls or fine judgements either way.

On balance they even themselves out over a season. You win some and you lose some.

Refs are human and WILL make mistakes they arent machines and again they usually balance themselves out.

It is a thankless job I have done it myself.

Having said all that I cant bring myself to be entirely happy with Ganson in particular for some reason.....

But that's the action of the ball carrier, not the man stood still, and the rules state...[iThe player who is in possession of the ball cannot be guilty of obstruction. He can make use of the goal posts to avoid a tackle,
or dodge behind a ruck of his own players or bore a way through his own pack.[/i

The only case for a penalty that I can imagine would be against the stationary player for not having raised his arms to indicate he was taking no part in the play.
Which would be very harsh indeed.

I'll have a look at the rules later when I have a chance, but your quote only sayus the ball carrier cannot be done for obstruction, it does not say whether a non-ball carrier can be done for obstruction.

Ganson would have penalised him FOR raising his arms

Oooooooh get her!!!!

Touchy for a scouser!!!

Have you posted this opinion on yer own board when your players are having a go at refs??
Or saying the same things when your fans are blaming ian smith for a loss and better still did you have this opinion when your former coach slated a ref publicly them he was magically never in charge of a saints match again.
It's all well and good having an opinion but people in glass houses and all that!

Yes if i felt it necessary. I thought Eastmond was wrong on Sat night and it is something that needs stamping out of the game WHOEVER does it. Daniel Anderson is entitled to his opinion but should he have done it publicly? Absolutely not. Smith not reffing us again was down to saints having the RFL in our pockets and what Daniel says goes.

I was not aware i was throwing stones, just offering an opinion. Has it really got to the point where we should all stay on our own boards???

Not at all but don't you see the irony of what you posted given your own teams reputation and previous???
Someone was bound to highlight it and afterall what did you expect????????

The original post was in agreement with a previous post, it was supposed to be a little light hearted and just my observations, that post in no way suggests saints are without fault and just because my club does not have a whiter than white past does not mean we are all tarred by the same brush. I am a qualiflied Ref and know what it feels like to be the man in the middle.

As i said in my original post. you won be happy