Magic Weekend vs Rhinos. Tansey Try from the penalty that shouldn't have been and the 20 metre offside decision that was missed. That was 2 refereeing decisions costing one team the match whilst handing it to the other.

Overall, I think that too often the inconsistencies in penalties is the difference between too many matches. I've tried my very best to be impartial as I can this season - I appreciate that no one is going to get every decision right for 80 minutes - but the "referee's interpretation" comes into play so much. I can only really cite Bradford games as examples as they're the ones I've been to, so:

Bradford vs Saints (Roby) - Plethora of penalties against Bradford in first 10 minutes for laying on. Player sin binned. Nothing really the other way.

London vs Bradford (Child) - Kaufusi horrendous head shot on Donaldson, knocking him out. Placed on report. Play stopped, penalty given. Later given 3 matches.

Bradford vs Catalans (Bentham) - Really fresh in the memory. This could be the only game of Rugby League I've ever seen where not one player has been offside throughout. It wasn't so much about what he gave (for the most part I thought he got the major calls right) but what he didn't.

I think moving to two referees is a brilliant idea. It's clearly too much for one man to watch for the defensive line being onside and making sure there is no interference/mistake at the play of the ball. A defensive ref and an attacking ref makes perfect sense.

I'd like to see the vr gone tbh. For me it hasn't worked. Slow the game down and often refs will look for reasons to not give tries. For example a player grounds the ball perfectly well and would be given if viewed in real time but we'll spend five minutes stood like chips while the vr slows it down to the point where he can show that for a fraction of 100th of a second there was a nanometer of separation between hand and ball.

There's a similar debate going on in cricket about the use of DRS and I can see your point about the focus on millimetres of separation. But the genie's out of the bottle as far as technology is concerned. If they scrapped the VR, Sky would still use the technology to highlight incorrect decisions. We'd still get numerous repeats of incidents and will spend most of the week after games listening to coaches and fans complaining about how they were robbed.

I don't necessarily agree that it encourages refs to not give tries. One thing that the technology has shown is just how good the players are at scoring in seemingly impossible positions. 20 years ago tries were routinely disallowed if there was any suggestion that the ball hadn't been properly grounded. Nowadays refs are much more inclined to believe that a player managed to get a legitimate touch on a ball a fraction of an inch before it went dead.

When it comes down to it though, it doesn't really matter if [ievery[/i single decision is correct or not, and let's be honest - one thing the video has proved is that the vast majority of decisions [iare[/i correct. Fine, we all sit at games and moan about the ref and always will; it's part of being a fan, but the only thing which really matters, well, there are two things actually, which are that [1] the referee gives an honest opinion and [2] the players accept that opinion and get on with the game. That, after all, is the situation we've had for nearly all the whole time rugby league [and every other sport] has existed. I don't remember it being [ithat[/i bad.

There have always been calls for consistency and decisions being 'right', which has led us to the video - to be honest I think we should be more careful what we wish for.

A lot of talk about refs and their video counterparts, but I must admit for several years i have wondered what the two guys running the touchline do? Two extra pair of eyes which rarely seem open.

You and me both, if they are just touch judges to adjudicate if a player goes into touch why is it when the ref asks them in the build up to a try do they have blanks looks on their faces and also why are they level with the play (one following the attacking line and the other the defensive) can they very rarely see the offsides even when they are totally blatant, and as they are running the touch line following the play can they never see forward passes, fair enough some are 50/50 and if the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking side so be it but some are ridiculous may aswel be watching the NFL.