i watched the game as a neutral in the pub with no sound, and would be interested in the reasons for allowing the Ratchford try under the posts.

I thought the camera angle from behind clearly showed that the trajectory of the ball had changed and therefore Ratchford had handled it, which then means he had to ground it at the first contact with the ground, yet it seemed quite clear that there was daylight when the ball hit the turf and the first grounding came with the torso.

What was the video ref looking at?

there were a few dubious calls last night against both teams, the penny try (could have been disallowed by another set of officials,although i personally thought it was fine)
the ratchford "try"
the knock on against goulding ( again some officials would have given it)
the penalty against singleton for passing off the ground

however despite these, it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game,Warrington would still have won.

Spot on

Im not so sure, all those incidents go the other way than they did and you have a very different game.

Even just taking the Singleton no try, Leeds were picking up momentum and that would have made it 18-12 with a fair bit to go.

However, I'm not blaming the officials for Leeds losing, Wire were the better side.

What I will say is that I don't think the new VR rules are actually working, that ratchford 'try' was a clear no try and shouldn't have been given but I think the VRs seem hesitant to overturn any decision at the moment.

I think that relates to his piece on Sky Sports website about players being allowed to "go back and play it again" when passing after the "held" call or carrying on running when they think they haven't been tackled. He argued that if you play on after you've been tackled, you should be penalised as you would have been in previous years.

I got the feeling that he was praising the fact that instead of Bentham telling Singleton to play the ball again, he was actually giving (as it turned out, incorrectly) a penalty.

While I'd agree that Clarke's "anyone but Leeds" bias has been in full flow ever since the flak he got for his "rugby gods" column on Danny McGuire a few years ago, on this occasion I don't think that was the case. No doubt he'll be back in the full Cherry And White cheerleader costume for next week's game against Wigan though.

Ah fair enough, I've not seen Boots N All - he gets the benefit of the doubt this time then..... Just...