The rule most definitely exists. It's right there on the RFL's website and has been used in other games this season too.
Just because there is an additional ref's interpretation whereby they CAN give a player the benefit of the doubt and not penalise him in this context, doesn't mean they HAVE to.

You may disagree with the referee's decision but it was a decision based upon the rules.

Don't show yourself up by saying daft things like Catalans should have had financial compensation, it just makes you look unreasonably biased and doesn't help your argument.

What blows your argument out of the water though is when you brought Stuart Cummings in as supporting evidence. I've lost count of the amount of times Cummings has got the rules wrong. From "any contact whilst competing in the air for a high ball is a penalty" to "you can knock on even if you're not playing at the ball when making a tackle."

He had little credibility when he left the RFL, he now has even less.


FWIW I thought Catalans were unlucky with a couple of decisions, most notably the Huddersfield try from a forward pass. Which of course brings into the debate the question over the use of touch judges.

But Catalans also benefitted from some decisions, a clear knock-on in the first half and some lenient reffing with regard some late hits on Brough.

In the end if Catalans could hold onto the ball, kick a relatively easy penalty goal and find touch from another penalty then they'd have won.

It was passed forwRd left the hands forward, travelled forward, it was without doubt a classic example of a forward pass.

Whether it travelled forward is irrelevant. I've yet to see any footage that shows the ball leaving the hands forward- and none from the vantage point of the official on the side who was in a perfect position to see. If you have then please post a link.

Yep. Definite forward pass.


Whether it travelled forward in relation to the player is relevant. And it did. That's why, in this case, you don't need a shot from the side clearly showing his hands, because you can see how the ball travels in relation to the player.

The fact that you think that pass was fine shows you don't understand the same rule that you are criticising other people for not understanding, and to keep saying that the officials didn't give it as forward so it must be fine is just daft.

No it's not relevant because the ball WILL travel forward in relation to the player. Its mechanics. The rule you claim I don't understand is nothing to do with where the ball ends up- it's to do with the passing motion from the players hands-in terms of relation to the player mcgilvary is behind Grix when the ball leaves his hands and is still behind him when he receives it despite Grix being impeded by a Catalan defender. I've yet to see any evidence that grixs passing motion was forwards. -that's the criteria for a forward pass. The official was stood in the best place to judge that.

if the dragons got every decision given to them every time their crowd appealed they'd have 150 penalties a game, i know they're a passionate lot, but jeez, they whinged, screamed, whistled and booed every time a giants player touched a dragons player, the crowd down in perpignan certainly gets on the referee's back, and early!

maybe M. Guasch is upset because he didn't cave into pressure from the crowd?

saying that, i said at the game i thought it was forward and i haven't seen a replay that proves otherwise, but they certainly got decisions that went their way on saturday, they also made a lot of errors that contributed to their defeat!