Indeed they were, got pretty much everything spot on.

As said, the Briers incident the ball did NOT go forwards, it went sideways. The fact it bounced forwards after it landed is totally irrelevant.

I can't believe any fair minded person would disagree that Leuluai knocked on, he was doing his best to grab hold of the ball and he very clearly knocked on - once you noticed it. It wasn't an obvious spot, and respect to the VR for spotting it and getting a key decision correct.

Same here, and I am one. It's no good moaning about a lack of intensity within the game whilst at the same time fussing over every minor indiscretion. It was about as serious as Bailey's flop on the grounded player - worthy of a penalty and nothing more.

And like I said, what appears on the screen "xxxxx- Attack" or "xxxxx - defense" is decided by the TV company and has got sod all to do with the glossary of terms within the supporting sections to the rules of the game. They decide what goes on screen for the purpose of the viewers/spectators not based the technicalities of the rules. The term on the glossary is "attacking team" and "defending team" NOT "attack"/"defense" would be the only argument the TV company would have for the error......................we dont care what the definitions say will be the fact.

Actually to put the matter to bed.... On BBC Manchester RL phone in, on the refs call section it was admitted that it was a mistake in the video booth...... Simples.... Different system to what they are used to on the sky games and it should have said scrum attack...

Is this still going?!

If they change it "Scrum [insert team]" then there won't ever be this confusion again. Agreed?

Let's move on. The OP was wrong, and has lost credibility, not rugby league.

To lose something, you have to be in possession of it, initially.