Just watched it...a few thoughts...

- the first Solomona no-try. This is what I don't like about the new system, and the NRL had a few instances of this last year. The ref, for me, has got it wrong. Solomona is not offside, but the fact it cannot clearly be seen from a camera angle leads to the try being disallowed. From the wide pitch-end angles common sense, timing of runs, etc tells me he's onside, but because it can't be PROVEN, it's disallowed.

- Cats play-acting/dramatics. The Garcia 'high-shot', the Escare 'knee' to the face (in fact, Escare in general) - ok, so there was limited contact in both cases but if there were Oscars for play-acting...and how did Dureau get away with his strop?!?! Never mind the constant football-esque appealing for penalties. I realise they're (mostly) French but still... oh and Escare in general - grubby little player.

- Didn't see Child do much wrong. Binned a few and did what he could. BTW, anyone who thinks any high challenge in that game was worse that Ah Van's on Charnley is an idiot.

Anyway, enjoyed it thoroughly, bit of biff and a good, hard, close game

Whilst I agree 100% that the players have ultimate responsibility, I think that's a bit of a cop out to protect the ref.

It's the refs job to facilitate the game - it's the nature of combatative sport that adrenaline will be high and tempers may fray in the heat of the moment - that's where the ref is vital in dealing with situations adequately and trying keep the tempera down.

Child does have form for ruining games with pedantic penalties - often applying the rules inconsistently and not allowing the game to flow. One thing I always think about Child is that he seems like a Ref who's never played the game and doesn't understand how certain situations can occur naturally, but he just applies the rules 'black and white' with no common sense applied. eg players being trapped in the tackle accidentally - this then raises frustration amongst the players.

There's also a real arrogance with Child and little in the way of any kind of rapport with the players - he speaks 'at' the players and can often be very condescending, again adding to the players frustrations.

Now this is the point where the players need better control, but they're already wound up, Child then exasperates the situation, and bingo, you've got a ratty, ill-tempered and disjointed game. This then becomes self fulfilling as more frustration means more penalties, means more James Child interjection....

It's got to the point that players now expect it from Child, so are probably in the wrong frame of mind as soon as they enter the field knowing Child is reffing.

This is the best post describing James Child as a referee

That kind of arrogance isn't always a bad thing but for it will only work for refs whose performances command respect.

Don't know if it's been mentioned but the Thaler decision to award a Leeds try last week when it was a clear obstruction was a shocker. You do have to wonder sometimes what the refs are seeing?

It's very easy to miss something like that on the run on the ground. If you look away for one moment to check to your left or right you'll miss it. The difference between Thaler and Child is that Child has repeated form for creating controversial situations, making incorrect decisions and lacking empathy with the players whereas Thaler doesn't.

Every ref misses things, every ref has bad performances, every ref makes incorrect critical decisions, evey ref will lose control of some games. It is a fact of life. James Child unfortunately manages to achieve it seemingly most weeks.

to be fair to child, and i have criticized him in the past, the players in the catalan-cas game didn't exactly make it easy for him, most officials would have struggled to contain that kind of aggressive behaviour and play acting from the french, yes he got a few things wrong like all officials do but the players have to also take some responsibilty for not heeding his warnings and acting professionally and getting on with the game.

That play developed in front of him though so not sure how he couldn't see it unless he was pigeon spotting or something! I mean it was as blatant a crossing and obstruction as you'll see. Sure they all make mistakes and the 50-50 won't always go your way but some decisions just seem bizarre.

In fairness McGuire's try looked worse on TV than it did live, possibly because the camera foreshortened the view.