The Ganson/Roby incident aside, I think the RFL really has to start looking at getting it's refereeing and disciplinary system in order. The inconsistencies in the decisions, suspensions and such is very poor, and the lack of transparency is what really aggravates fans.

I recall a few years back that my team Castleford played Wakefield at Millenium Magic, when Mr Child set a record amount of penalties for a game, much to the dissatisfaction of both coaches. He then was in charge of the Good Friday match a few months later and gave what I believe was less there or there abouts a record low amount. I remember thinking at the time, how can a game with the same teams, and the same referee in charge, be officiated so differently? Offences such as laying on and offside, that were given literally once every two or three minutes, had just disappeared? How can that happen?

That illustrated to me how a referee can literally pick and choose how to officiate a game. It appeared almost a defiant two fingers to the people who'd complained about too many penalties, with a new attitude of "fine, I won't give any penalties."

From the sound of it, Wakefield were given a similar treatment according to Agar, but over the course of a half time interval, which, if so, is unfair.

We don't pay money to watch referees. On Sunday at Salford, James Child made almost every scrum re-pack or re-feed the ball, and you can just sense how frustrated both sets of spectators become. It's not necessary, and the lack of awareness and common sense is just astounding.

I genuinely do worry that the referees Tim Roby, Robert Hicks, James Child are three of the worst officials in my time watching the game. Steve Ganson, Bentham, Kirkpatrick, Silverwood, Ian Smith, these guys at least seemed or seem to be in control, in a sense. I guess this generation of referees are younger than the aforementioned, but it's clear to me that fans are more disillusioned with officials than ever before. I mean, it's a rugby fans' perogative to complain about referees, and will be until the end of time, but something needs to change. Whether that is bringing in new referees, bringing in a second referee, I don't know - but I think the RFL needs to act.

Same goes for the disciplinary. Ben Flower and Mickey Pea both committed cannonball tackles against Castleford in the last two weeks - one resulted in a penalty and a sin binning with no ban, one wasn't sin binned with a 2 match ban? Likewise, Justin Carney got two three match bans for lifting/spear tackles against Saints and London last year, and committed a similar offence in the game on Sunday, but this season, doesn't get charged (even though it looked to me as though if following last years precedence, he should well be).

I'd like to think the RFL will start to see how these decisions can anger/put off supporters, and I don't think an #asktheref Twitter publicity machine where a referee tells you that night is day and black is white to justify the decisions is any help. We have a fantastic game as a spectacle, and the officials are really beginning to spoil it.

There didn't seem to be a massive difference. Saints obviously got more penalties in the 2nd half, but we also stopped dropping the ball and making stupid mistakes. That got us on the front foot, and resulted in Wakey understandably trying to slow the game down, which resulted in the majority of the penalties.

according to agars interview, that is exactly what he said happened.

Were you at the game?

After Wakefield scored straight after half time to make it 16-4, a pattern emerged of Saints getting to the 4th or 5th tackle then Wakefield were penalised rather dubiously. The first 4 penalties resulted in 4 scores to put saints ahead. This all happened in a period of 14 minutes. Wakefield weren't going to come back from this despite it only being half way into the second half. Over the whole game Wakefield had to defend 10 more sets than Saints.

It doesn't matter who Ganson supports, why was he in the ref's dressing room at half time and was he there officially or unofficially?

it must be true then.

So, to sum up this whole thread :

Wakefield played best in the first half, and Saints played best in the second half, ultimately winning the game.

In the opinion of some disappointed Wakefield fans, the only cause of this was that the referee, having had a blameless performance while Wakefield were winning, suddenly became rubbish when Saints were winning.

This was because a different referee, who is biased to Saints, told him to cheat.

And the on-pitch referee, who is not biased to Saints, or maybe is (sorry, getting confused) decided to cheat as a result.

It most certainly was not because of any of the following more unlikely explanations :

- Saints played better in the second half than the first
- Wakefield played worse in the second half than the first
- Wakefield gave away more penalties than Saints by committing more infringements
- Saints gave away fewer penalties than Wakefield by committing fewer infringements
- Saints have a better quality set of players than Wakefield.

It's true, looking at that list, that those are such far-fetched explanations that the only reason I can think of to explain the bizarre result at Wakefield this weekend, is that two referees decided to cheat because one of them likes Saints.

I can't believe there are still fools out there who think that games are decided on irrelevant issues such as player quality, form, on-field discipline, fitness etc. What silliness.

Where shall we string up Ganson and Roby, by the way ? I like a good lynching..

Ganson would have been better off not going to the refs room at half time, and if he felt he needed to it might have paid him to at least notify both teams coaches prior to it.

Ganson was a maverick as a referee and made things up as the game progressed. Now they've further inflated his ego by giving him his present job and by jove he's enjoying himself. Whatever Roby was or wasn't doing Ganson should not have been anywhere near him during the match. If Roby has cocked up during the match he should have been reprimanded later as Ganson's actions have only served to conjure up conspiracy theories.

I was there.

I saw a pattern emerge of a stronger team that stopped making mistakes and started to dominate the game. The general trend in most games is that the penalty count swings in favor of the dominant team. It is quite simple really, stop giving away penalties and the penalty count wont go against you.


Anyway, Roby is a Wiganer so I can say with certainty that he is definitely biased against Saints.

I have to say now the dust has settled, that the most likley reason for the 15 minutes of penalties and possession for Sts, is that Sts speeded up the game.

I didn't feel like the ref managed the game very well at all and there were plenty of incidents you could compare to say there was unbalanced treatment but when it comes down to it, Wakefield needed to get off the tackle without giving any penalties away.

I'd like to have seen better reffing of the Wilkin incident which would have changed the game, and Amor incident which probably wouldn't have changed the game...............but I'd also have liked Riley to pass to an open man for a walk in try and Sammut to get the ball away when he tried with another near open line.


BUT, when the someone goes to see the ref at half time and appears to be upset with something it causes doubt and allows people to worry about conspiracies. Better not to do that and I hope Ganson is reprimanded.

Saints are my team, so perhaps my bias is causing this thread to rile me a little.
So, away from the contenders and the result I will make the following comment

If the head of the refs' department is on site and he sees one of his team not performing (in his opinion, of course), then why shouldn't he take the first opportunity to express his opinion?

Wakefield still got the first penalty and try of the second half, so there can't have been much of a conspiracy.

Ganson's reffed plenty of Saints games without being biased towards us. He was also the guy who sent Morley of after 5 seconds of a test match.

As for the penalties being dubious, I know it feels rough at the time, but someone once wisely said to me that as long as there's any argument for that decision, then its a matter of opinion and you have to accept it. Its only calls that are gobsmackingly wrong (take the Hull Fc/Hull KR video call by Ganson last year) that you can get upset about them.