Seriously was that a eight point try ? You see that nearly every single week. I don't think It would have made difference to the score at all but it's two weeks in a row we've had two unusual calls against us.

How many teams have a eight point try against them in a season? How many have a penalty try against them in a season? We've had both in two weeks.

Our discipline isn't good enough but jesus we getting hammered on the penalty count big time.

Every game I watch that involve Robert Hicks and Phil Bentham are ruined due to them awarding penalties for everything.

I thought the penalty try was fair. I thought the 8 pointer was fair on first viewing. Subsequent viewings I thought it was maybe overcooked.

As for the penalties, it's not the refs imo. I used to shout at the ref for awarding penalties. Now I find myself shouting at the players! Some of those penalties are just stupid. You can see them coming, and I don't understand why the players can't!

Could he not have gone to the video ref ?

No it wasn't and as a PieEater I think the foul on Walmsley which got him over charged should have been a red card to the Hull player.

Saints player put on report for brushing past Bentham ?? This is becoming a joke , quite clearly accidental , quick word from the VR sorts it there and then . No case to answer .

slid into carlos with his knees, does that on the field of play its a penalty, so correct decision

as for the turget incident, no complaints, but how peyroux got away with just a penalty and no sin bin for a blatent shoulder charge on sneyd is why many fans get peed off with our officials!

That was exactly how I saw it. I think he should have checked with the video ref. Turgut should have been sent off and Peyroux given at least 10 minutes.

On the replay it clearly shows he didn't slide in wirh his knees. All on the sky team agreed.

He should have gone to the video ref as the game was still on knife edge. I don't think the eight point try changed the game tbh, I think Hull was the better team and deserved the win without shadow of a doubt.

it was late, still a penalty as he made contact with carlos well after he grounded the ball

Not sure it's in the VR protocol that can allow a view. I watched this game as a neutral by the way.
First view looked bad, second view on sky looked innocuous, third and subsequent view looked again and went yep it deserved action there was no need for him to do it. Flow of a game can effect these types of decisions. Was it accidental or deliberate? With what had happened earlier in the game with that player were his actions as a result of that and was he looking for some revenge?.
Fwiw for me I think the shoulder charge on Sneyd could easily have been yellow, that was a let off. The elbow on the ground yellow was sufficient, I thought that had given you the game though.

On the video you clearly see his right knee connect with his side round about kidney level

Um... no. The replay clearly shows his right knee sliding into Carlos well after the ball was grounded. And Cummings agreed with the penalty, correctly pointing out that there was plenty of time to pull out of the tackle and no real need to attempt it in the first place. The other muppets waffled a lot, but we also had them defending a forward shoulder-charging a halfback in the head, so meh.

Liam Farrell had an 8 point try awarded against him last season for much the same thing (Wire at the DW). He also got a 1 match ban. I think this incident was very similar in that both players went in after the ball was grounded and in both instances could have pulled out of the challenge if they'd wanted to.

That said, you'll see similar instances throughout the season that don't get penalised. We certainly did last year and I found myself commenting more than once "what was the difference..?" As ever it comes down to consistency. We just can't seem to get any from our current crop of referees.

At the same time I think Peyroux was a very lucky boy to stay on the field, as it was direct contact to the head with the shoulder, so I suppose you could argue that the inconsistency benefitted both sides at different points in the match.

Another nonsense decision against us. You do start to wonder if there is some form of bad feeling from the referees at the moment. We wouldn't get either of the decisions this week or last weeks. Perhaps though we just notice them more because we're terrible and near the bottom.

Never mind eh?

I guess all them years at the top gaining dubious decisions in your favour have finally been snuffed out. Welcome to the real world of rugby where you get jack poop down at the bottom end