Close but in that case i would of used only four stars

The other difference of course is that this was a BBC game and the audio feed from the ref's microphones is available to the general public which is the only reason we know he asked Silverwood for an opinion.

Perhaps Sky should also start doing this - would allow for greater transparency in the decision-making process.

And Tigertot - I agree that sentence futher up was a bit paranoid. Logically it made sense at the time for 2 senior referees to use the technology available. It did come across that they were sort of making it up as they went along though. The VR should have clearly defined areas of responsibilty - and that is Cummings job to design that and filter it down to his team. If Ganson wasn't sure then it would have been on report and we might be in the next round with Wigan fans complaining more than they are at present!

Does Raynor have the opportunity to challenge his disciplinary process if part of it already has not followed properly designated procedures? That could be a further consequence of this.

And of course I would have instead said "Klein"...

Im almost positive in years gone by the sky games you used to be able to hear what the refs were saying ??

The irony of Raynor & videos has only just struck me. Perhaps it's Phil Clarke's rugby gods extracting revenge.

It's a good point about the using of the VR for high tackles. Naturally i feel it was right to do so and Bulls fans probably won't. But it still begs the question can the ref do it.....

I dont think bulls fans are saying he wasnt right to do so, its latter of your comment which is on the minds as appose to is he able to it, as this has not been seen before from what anybody can recall ??

Can't recall it happening myself either.

If it is able to be referred upstairs, it needs to be consistent, no one knows if ganson actually seen the tackle and what he would of done if there was no VR available.....

It needs to be made so each game has a VR or no game has a VR to cut out the inconsistencies

Well, I don't believe the VR has any right to send a player off, and that is effectively what happened. If Ganson had been sure it was a sending off, then he would have got his red card out and never asked the VR to look at it endlessly, which he did. If somebody can produce RFL rules or VR procedures to the contrary then I will happily reconsider, and whether he should or should not have the right is a different question, but if he doesn't (and don't hold your breath for Cummings/RFL to tell us) then it shouldn't have happened.

If Ganson had thought that a foul had been committed he should have gone to the video ref before giving the try. The video ref could then have had a look, decided if it was a foul, and if so awarded a penalty under the sticks after the conversion had been taken.

This might be what potter was referring to when he said he was going to grow through the proper channels

Unless someone produces the rules saying he can't ask the VR for confirmation of his view whether reviewing a try or not I, & virtually everyone who isn't a Bulls fan, is satisfied with how Ganson handled it. Raynor would have walked without the technology, so why not use it for avoidance of any doubt unless it is ultra vires?

Yes technically and 8 point try - but the question still remains, can he refer to the man upstairs for the sending off or should this be ganson and his touch judges decision alone ???