Good god. Start of the second half vs. Hudds in Round 3, Wire get the ball.... Ratchford is tackled on the first, sky tackle count graphic shows 1st and then immediately shows 2nd. Then on the 2nd tackle, it shows third etc. Chris Bridge ends up being tackled and the ref orders a turnover (You can hear him say "are you sure?" on the coverage, i.e. the 4th official overrode him on the tackle count after the third tackle) ... Now, which is more embarrassing, an official getting a count wrong in a non-televised game, or officials' making a mistake because they relied on the Sky TV technology which is subject to just as much human error.

Having said all that, I would agree that Alibert had a stinker on Sunday - he seemed to get quite a bit wrong for both teams from where I was stood (the knock-on from the kick off before Westwood's try looked like it went back for me), but without access to the full video, I couldn't say for certain what he genuinely got wrong and what I simply didn't see properly from where I was stood.

Thank you - at least it's not just me; the bigger picture is that we have an embarassingly inept group of officials overseeing the weekly rounds of an elite competition, upon which millions of pounds and many people's livelihoods (as Royce Simmons will attest) depend - not to mention having a direct impact on the quality of my weekend.

We urgently need two ref's on the field, like the NRL, or at least touch judges who actually have some responsibility to assist the man in the middle.

I'm no fan of the two referee system personally, but the main argument against it is, we don't have enough top liine officials to fund it. If we did have enough of them, the likes of Mr Alibert, after his performance on Sunday, would find himself ousted for more than one game from taking charge of a top flight game.



The touch judges communicate with the ref via radio systems now, instead of signalling infringments/offside etc with their flag, I think it's a common misconception that they "do nothing". Maybe we 'should' go back to them using the flags, at least in addition to the radio, to let the fans know they're looking at and/or seeing things.

The referee's are certainly not great, but they dont grow on trees. The wages of referees in this country are less than those in Australia and it shows. Not as many people are willing to take the abuse and everything that comes with the job, and until that changes we cannot replace those who take charge of SL games. The ones who have more recently come into the top level refereeing are poor, Hicks, Childs etc. Therefore the problem also lies with the training and the way the systems work in this country, if the RFL want better officials and more of them, they need to find the cash to fund this progression for the good of the game. Unfortunately, as this has been the case for a while now it appears they dont have any plans to do this, and we will be stuck with the same old poop

Oh well, gives us something to moan about, us Brits love that

Widnes were once given a set of one by John Holdsworth in a John Player semi v Wire.

Wire kicked on the last, Widnes gathered the kick, went 80 yards up the pitch and JH ruled it the sixth tackle having failed to restart the count for the change of possession.

I'm with you on that one. A lot of the time the refs and assistants are missing things not because they're blind (as we usually accuse them of from the terraces in the heat of the moment), but because either their positioning is poor, or the also-likely case of all of them looking in the same direction. For example they could all find themselves looking whether anything 'untoward' is happening during/after the tackle is completed, instead of paying attention to the defensive line being onside - or vice versa.

IMO there is no need for the pocket referee system from the NRL, just a clarification of clearly defined roles and responsibilities of each official on the field.

Although it isnt easy to be the governing body of an elite sport, the RFL do come across as somewhat incompetent at times. Every fan has an opinion on what they think is wrong with the game or what needs to change, but I think everyone would agree the standard of refereeing needs to improve. I fully agree the RFL need to do something, but how can us, the fans, get them to do this? In looking at the sport they are governing, they should be aiming to improve every aspect of the game which would include refereeing, however this just isnt happening. They will probably say well we have had an increase in referees, more full time officials blah blah blah, but although that is good it is not enough, nor does it focus on the quality of referees. IMO they need a fully committed, well financed programme in place controlled by people who know what they are doing. Give referees higher salaries, this should encourage more to follow this path. Make the training and experience more challenging and thorough to increase the standard of referees. Once these two things are developed and there are a greater number of elite officials, not only should they be better refs they can also be accountable for decisions. If they cock up one week, another ref can take their place which doesnt happen at the moment.

Communication from the governing body to the fans would help here. In a lot of cases, it's not just the refs that get things wrong, it's the fans themselves. There are countless examples on RLFans alone (so god knows how many more examples you'd find by joining in post-match pub debates) where people confidently state that a rule says one thing, only to be countered and corrected by others showing that they quite clearly have never read the rule book.

Take offside for instance, it's the age-old favourite of Rugby League fans to complain about, the rules are simple - but there have been mentions in the past by referees on radio phone-ins etc that they each approach the 10-metre thing in different ways - some referees take the teams back 11/12 metres, and then allow them to creep forward slightly - others say that they themselves go back further than the 10 and allow the teams to stand in front of him which affords him a slightly better view of who may be encroaching the 10 (which is logical, no human being alive has 180 degree vision to my knowledge). The key to it though, according to said officials on phone-in programs, is that they each consult with the teams' coaches prior to a game to inform them of what they expect from the players during the game.

Now, the above info is quite a few seasons old (from memory, the bulk of it game when Ashley Klein was a guest on GMR), so things may have changed slightly, but different refs handling things in different ways is a recipe for disaster to start off with, but it also means that fans actually don't have a clue about what's going on. In the specific example of refs deliberately going back further than the players, of course this is going to make it look like the opposition are [ialways[/i offside - and let's be honest, the majority of us never bother looking to see if our own team are offside as well.

Most of the ambiguity of different approaches to controlling a game, or current "interpretations" being used (which are not in the official laws book), could be rectified immediately by the RFL simply telling us what's going on. It's not like they would even have to spend any money on doing it, all they need do is e-mail the relevant press contact lists and RLFans among others would happily publish the latest instructions to referees from Red Hall.

Have you done any reffing? Ive only reffed a couple of unofficial u12's training games and it's harder than it sounds. It's not about "counting to six". It's counting off six tackles, sometimes 7 as there might be a zero tackle, whilst looking for offside (both defence and attack), markers not square, interference at the ptb, holding down, correct ptb, forward passes, obstruction, offside at a kick, knock ons, high tackles, when is the player held, was he tackled before he offloaded plus more. Do that for a few sets of six including communicating to the players during play and you'll soon see how easy it is to get distracted and suddenly think "oh bollox is that the 2nd or 3rd tackle". My tactic is to simply guess at 3rd if I forget!
Now Uncle Alibert has (or should have) a bit more help since he's wired up to touch and in-goal judges but then it's high pressured, very fast and with both teams trained to get away with whatever they can. So I can fully understand how he might have mis-counted. Let's face it, if Warrington hadn't scored from it no-one would have noticed or cared.
If it was happening all the time then maybe there might be a case for some kind of action by the RFL, but I don't think it is and I don't think it's as huge an issue as is being made out. It's a refereeing mistake. Is it any worse than the Catalan try given after a knock-on by Blanch?

But why wouldnt we want to see these mistakes minimised as much as possible with efforts made to improve these things? Its a mistake that can easily be avoided. And obviously the Blanch knock on should have been seen, hence why I have stated the referee's need to develop and get better. Human error will happen but at the moment I dont think we are doing enough to minimise it

A position on the board at Odsal surely awaits.

But why vilify the referee in all cases, as is often quoted - they don't miss tackled or drop the ball, so when a team plays the perfect game, then they can gripe about the ref.

Yes they could be better and any failings of refs I place firmly on one mans shoulders, but he is seemingly bullet proof now.

How long have referees been full time pros? And aren't they only full time in Superleague? It's a tough ask for someone to go through years of training and advancement through the grades for a possible shot at one of half a dozen paying jobs.

And after listening to Jamie Bloem talk about becoming a ref, I agree with him - all full time players should have to take the refereeing course.