The way ganson was favouring your lot tonight you should have got more if you were playing that well.

I wonder whether Cummings criticised Ganson's efforts last week and he spat his dummy in response and refused to penalise anything around the ruck last night. Whatever the reason, he's lost it completely (if he ever had it).

Criticism of the remarkable inconsistency between games shown by ganson is quite fair. However the rabid frothings of so many posters saying he gave the game to wigan once again shows the pathetic mob like attitude many people have here.

Ganson goes to the VR on the first cats try after checking with the assistant. Does this mean he was bent or incompetent? The VR rules a player was offside - which he was . Nothing to do with ganson.

Ganson spots a forward pass which was a close call but even wiggy concedes that one of the tv angles shows it is probably forward.

So, while it could have esily been given there is also some evidence to say ganson was right. A little unluck for cats but was ganson bent in disallowing th try - hardly.

The thing that ganson didn't do was stand 30 yards off the play, too knackered to get back in the attacking line - as early as the first half, and continue to do so into the 2nd half. He also didn't flatten the much vaunted catalan pack - that was wigans 13 and 9.

He also missed a huge amount of infringements in the first half especially where he could have penalised cats - and if he really had an agenda to put wigan into the semi he would have done so - and would have been a far less blatant way of doing it.

Better to work youselvs into a frenzy though eh? What will the next wigan lynch mob be for i wonder?
i

Just for being Wigan. Thats more than enough

Wigan were the better team and I'm happy to accept, as always, that any bias was subconscious. Or that close calls all going one way can happen by chance - like a normal coin coming up heads or tails 6 times in a row.
Cats were knackered and probably dispirited, in part because every decision seemed to go against them.
The theory that it was blatant indicates the issue wasn't real... hmmm.
A potentially really good game was ruined and a strong Wigan performance has been put in the shadow. Refs, like players, can have bad games - and this was a stinker. I honestly think it was that rather than any great dislike of Wigan. Its not like its just Saints and Wire fans on this thread.

Spot on.

There was plenty more Catalan could have been penalised for - late hits/flops, grappling, messing around on the floor, etc. I actually thought Ganson did well to let it flow as much as he did.

It doesn't help when you've got people like that fat bitter moron Garry Schofield tweeting "Should be 18-12. Ganson having a stinker." First disallowed try - offside. It's a harsh call but those are the rules. Correct call. Second disallowed try - forward pass. The only clear view of the pass showed it to be forward, and Ganson had a good view. Correct call. And just to clarify for a few idiots on here, it wasn't disallowed for double movement, nor is there some shady RFL anti-Catalan conspiracy.

Catalan came out firing and tried to bully Wigan, but Wigan were simply far too aggressive and dominant, too disciplined, showed some great skills in attack and took their chances much better.

Edited for truth!

Quite.

Any Everton supporters may recall a similar incident where Stevie G told Clattenberg to send Tony Hibbert off in the Derby a few years ago, after he had originally pulled out a yellow card. Pathetic from the officials.

Aye.

If Clattenburg would have pulled the right card out first time, Gerrard wouldn't have had to correct him

Of course, Pat Richards is the only player in Superleague to appeal for the Video Ref.

I thinks it more the fact that ganson changed his mind at richards request, can you ever recall a ref changing there mind at the request of a quins, wakey, salford etc player? Officials shouldnt change there decisions at the request of a player.

Did he? That's a bit of an assumption.

Ganson [iappeared [/ito be about to award a try, but he didn't. He had second thoughts and went to the VR but he may have made that decision with or without Richards' appeal. For all we know several Wigan players were appealing - we see players appeal every week on Sky but how much influence that has over refs we'll never know.

On the other hand, if that appeal raised a doubt then Ganson was right to hand it over - and that decision is completely vindicated by the fact a player was indeed offside and the try correctly disallowed.

I'm not sure why all the fuss. The outcome was the correct one.

So you believe what wiggy tells you?

Never mind, ignorance is bliss.

The point is though plenty of teams have appealed for the video ref and never get it, when it could have won them the game, either all players should be able to get the ref to use the vr or none, anything else is double standards. Would you not agree that we should have consistency and fairness from the referees?

I don't think that's true at all. If players put in strong appeals referees will probably have an element of doubt and go to the VR. I don't know how many tries go to VR but it's a lot. The slightest doubt and it's handed over.

On the flip side, players will also appeal whether they have genuine reason to or not - for all they know the ref or VR might actually find a reason to disallow the try. Referees have to differentiate between genuine appeals and chancers. On this occasion it was a genuine and valid appeal and the outcome was correct.

But again, we don't actually know he went to the VR due to Richards' appeal. That was just speculation from dumb & dumber on Sky.