I just don't see how its possible to stick a 16 or 17 year old onto a pitch to referee even his/her own age group let alone open age without expecting that person to suffer personal abuse and have his ability questioned time and again.

We like to think that our sport is above all of the referee abuse that is commonplace in football but the truth is, away from the pro-leagues, its just as bad and you need to have a certain confidence and character to carry it off, none of which you'll have at that young age unless you are a remarkable person.

I think you've quoted the wrong man!

Really?! Well that's utterly boring of them! Surely us discussing the game and using those images will make it more likely people will add to their viewing figures? Short sighted buggers. BBC didn't complain about the screen grabs I put on the VT last year!

Perhaps it's that remarkability and resilience gained refereeing those games as a youth that makes pro referees appear aloof and or arrogant. Perhaps surviving years of having their judgments questioned gives them cast iron confidence in their decision making that takes them away from being reasoned with.

4 decisions stand out which child should be held account for.

Leeds first try, forward pass not give. Leeds benefit.

Smith forward pass. Marginal at best, but you cannot argue with child's positioning. Benefit to Hull.

Smith being penalised for moving off the mark / not playing the ball. Very harsh decision. Benefit to Hull.

Manu being penalised for lashing out after Ablett had gouged Manus eye. Leeds benefit. On a connected note, I hope McDermott instills a bit of discipline to Ablett, not the first time he has used someone's face as a bowling ball.

Overall the dodgy decisions evened themselves out

Video ref not allowing tickles second effort. I couldn't see a reason for it being disallowed, and should have been BOD.

Whilst I don't fully agree with the first statement he made, I can see his point. People make out like the referee's position is easy because they spot all the things he does wrong and ultimately think they could do a better job. They don't realise that they miss out on the great calls they make, as well as the fact that the VAST majority of calls that fans think are wrong are in fact right.
If people are going to be overly critical of a group of people to the point were everything is about said group of people, they should do something about it.

The second point he makes I totally agree with. It's not arrogant. It's naive on your part to think that just because you watch the game, you know how it should be best reffed. The vast majority of fans don't even know the bloody rules properly. How many times do you hear fans kicking off that a player is offside at a tap 20 despite making the tackle on the 30m line for example? And that's the point he's trying to make.

Referees don't get the respect they deserve. In the heat of the moment, I'll admit I often call then a lot of things at times, but afterwards I can take a balanced view and agree on the calls made. Things even themselves out, and Child didn't actually do a lot wrong yesterday.

Apart from the critical forward pass decision from Smith to Webb ..... none of it detracts from his over enthusiastic use of the whistle in [ievery[/i match he refs.

It was a marginal forward pass. The reason it's got Leeds fans in a flustered is because many of those marginal forward passes are missed during the rest of the match. That you describe it as critical is misrepresenting the situation. If Leeds had gone on to win by 2 points then you could say the decision not to call a forward pass for Leeds first was critical.

And then you could also say that Tickle's Benefit of the Doubt try that wasn't given was also critical. And the 2 forward pass tries that [iwere[/i given for Leeds were critical.

I agree that Leeds are so used to getting away with this and other "tactics" it's become the norm for them. That's why they got so wonderfully petulent when it didn't work last night.

Child may have made some dubious decision for both sides - but credit to him for not letting Leeds get away with their usual murder last night.

Chip + shoulder And then you could also say that Tickle's Benefit of the Doubt try that wasn't given was also critical. And the 2 forward pass tries that [iwere[/i given for Leeds were critical.

I agree that Leeds are so used to getting away with this and other "tactics" it's become the norm for them. That's why they got so wonderfully petulent when it didn't work last night.

Child may have made some dubious decision for both sides - but credit to him for not letting Leeds get away with their usual murder last night.'"

Nope, they are extremely litigious, its why all Youtube links are banned now as well, mainly because most of them are Sky copyright footage and even if they aren't they will still argue that they have bought the rights to all SL game time in every ground - which of course they have.

To me it all boils down to one simple rule which applies to all rugby games of any level - you need a ref, you can't play even in a pub team without a ref - so the referee is the first and final arbiter of any decision, end of story.

He might not always be right, he might sometimes be right and you're wrong but can't see it yet, but he is the referee and you either play by his rules or not at all.

Personally I hate to see players constantly questioning the referee and I'm afraid we have one of the worst perpetrators in our team.

The law also clearly states that the tackler has to release and move away. So the first offence was by Lynch who still had contact as Smith tried to PTB and at the very least was impeding Smith. So IMO the ref got it 100% wrong.

Agree in principal with this, particulary the last part. What I would question in the appointment and training of refs. Child has been constantly bad for all teams for a long time, doesn't seem to improve at all, sure there must be better prospects out there who could ref. not up to standard for me.

Having watched the game back a few times I'd hesitate to call it 'critical' regardless of whether it was forward or not. At least two Hull players were in position to tackle the ball carrier and there was no support in sight. I'd put the chances of a try being scored at around 50% at best.