We were poor in the first half and did'nt deserve a win, the second half improvment was encouraging. Tim Roby was not the reason we lost but he is by far the worst ref i've seen this season, one bloke behind me said we should give him a rule book in brail and i am told that the Radio Leeds comentators asked who was ref today Tim Roby or Sam Tompkins.

To some, yes, but I have this theory that actually most fans don't have that much gripe with the refs. It is just the vocal minority that just make it seem as if there's more criticism than there is.


Well, we've had the "zero tolerance" debate many times, IMHO as long as both teams are seemingly doing their best to keep to the rules, then I'd rather the benefit of the doubt be given to all marginal and all questionable calls in favour of keeping the game flowing.


Not ignored, the ref makes a decision, that decision is to let it go. Did you mean borderline infringements? I think this can be dealt with on the fly, and should be. If players are taking a bit too long in the tackle, the ref can shout warnings while not immediately penalising. Similarly with many other offences, but in context (for example, player A only gets back 9 not the full 10, if he seemed to make an effort and isn't directly involved in the play, let it go, or if in doubt, a running warning; but if he makes a tackle from there, then penalise. (I know that good refs in good form do basically often do the above anyway).


Agreed, though I'd prefer a decision for the season and, fine tuning apart, stick with it.

The criticism is a direct result of the inconsistency in approach. For example one week anything goes at the ruck and another week the pea is blown out of the whistle. As you say they need to decide what they're doing and all stick to it and let everyone know what they're doing and why. If they feel the need to change then say so and why.

They also have to publicly declare they will pay no attention to the puerile, ignorant garbage eminating from the gobs of Eddie & Stevo.

Does anyone pay any attention to them anymore?

You assume everyone is as perceptive as you and I.

This is one of those things which I just don't understand [and infuriates me a bit, to be honest]. People refer to not blowing the whistle as, "Letting the game flow", when it's patently the pole opposite - how is allowing players to set up camp over an tackled attacker, "allowing the game to flow"? 'cos I'm baffled.

There is a rule book. All teams and officials should play to the rules. Any deviation will lead to:-
All officials are cheats, don't know what they are doing etc..
Players taking advantage, laying on, pinching yards etc..
Fans become frustrated, angry etc..
It should not be too difficult in these days with all the means of distributing information that the RFL can and should explain changes, interpretation of the rules etc..
It's the lack of responsibility by the RFL who leave it to the poor officials to shoulder the blame. The RFL only seem to want to take the praise and credit without any recall to what's happening in the real world.

Part of the problem is I do not know what the rules actually say, & I would wager most don't on here either. A number no doubt take their advice from the pair of cretins on Sky. So I doubt there is usually clear transgression as such & that it is being ignored, as ever it is the players, officials & fans' interpretation of the laws, which is down to human error.

Quote: tigertot "Part of the problem is I do not know what the rules actually say, & I would wager most don't on here either. A number no doubt take their advice from the pair of cretins on Sky. So I doubt there is usually clear transgression as such & that it is being ignored, as ever it is the players, officials & fans' interpretation of the laws, which is down to human error.'" Laws of the game can be found here: www.therfl.co.uk/more/referee About half way down the page.

Quote: tigertot "Part of the problem is I do not know what the rules actually say, & I would wager most don't on here either. A number no doubt take their advice from the pair of cretins on Sky. So I doubt there is usually clear transgression as such & that it is being ignored, as ever it is the players, officials & fans' interpretation of the laws, which is down to human error.'" Laws of the game can be found here: www.therfl.co.uk/more/referee About half way down the page.

And that's the problem. The rules need to be tightened up to remove the need for interpretation

1. The laws were translated by a Japanese-born Serbian from Cyrillic. Or at least many of them read that way. They are often very poorly expressed, and this does nothing to help interpretation. As so many past threads demonstrate.

2. I am not confident that the laws as per RFL website are actually 100% the same as whatever the laws are in the refs' handbook Does anyone know?

3. Due to (1) and due to a need to tinker and address what are seen as "problem areas" there are various directives issued to the refs, some we know about, many we clearly don't, but these of course have the effect of being revisions of the laws, or else how they naturally read; they MUSt in effect be - as otherwise they wouldn't be necessary.

So, badly written laws, and a secretive system of temporary interpretations and instructions. It is no surprise none of us can really follow it.

I've thought this for a long time. The Laws are not all encompassing (such as the "flop"icon_wink.gif and many are non specific in their terminology - such as, and not exclusiveDirection of Pass 1. The direction of a pass is relative to the player making it and not to the actual path relative to the ground. A player running towards his opponents’ goal line may throw the ball towards a colleague who is behind him but because of the thrower’s own momentum the ball travels forward relative to the ground. This is not a forward pass as the thrower has not passed the ball forward in relation to himself. This is particularly noticeable when a running player makes a high, lobbed pass.[/i

Have you got that? I have'nt.

That is easy & obvious. There is a training video (from yawnion IIRC) demonstrating it, it has parallel lines at intervals of a couple of metres. It is therefore obvious if the receiver is behind the passer & if the initial trajectory is not forward in relation to the lines. What is also obvious is that the ball can end up metres in front of the line from where the passer passed due to the ball's momentum.