Or perhaps it puts us more in line with the NRL refs who last year were letting plenty go (as we saw in the World Cup!).

By allowing a little more holding down, there is an argument that this will develop skills more, as you need to be better to break defences as they can get set, rather than making cheap yards through scoots from acting half and simply winning through pace.

He was fine. All the major decisions towards the end of the game were correctly called both by Smith on the field and Alibert as the video ref.

The only one which was debatable was the 'obstruction' of JJB by Newton. That was called in line with how that sort of decision is normally called though, and I don't have a problem with them remaining consistent.

The worst decision he made was allowing the Sheriffe try from last week where he knocked the ball on.

I find Alibert's taste for settling high controversy refreshing.

No it isn't. That's a misconception caused by the lack of knowledge of an outspoken commentator.

viewtopic.php?t=401815 This is clearly a trend. He is shocking, but I am sure there are those who will simply say, why don't you go out and do it better.

viewtopic.php?t=401815 This is clearly a trend. He is shocking, but I am sure there are those who will simply say, why don't you go out and do it better.

I have no problem with Alibert as a match official, but no confidence in him as a video ref. It seems to be a lottery every time a decision is handed to him. He spends a lot time looking at replays and angles that will not show anything, for example he looked at about 2 or 3 replays of Kallum Watkins passing the ball tonight and last week used a camera angle from behind the sticks when checking an offside decision from a kick. I've also heard the referee on a few occasions asking if Alibert can hear him properly or having difficulty communicating with him. As a referee, where he has the help of touch judges and doesn't have to make such crucial decisions he is fine, but he clearly isn't ready to be used as a video ref yet.

Bulls win game. Folk who do not wish us well find things to whinge about. Nothing new under the sun.

The decisions to disallow Webb and McGuire's try were correct.

Jonas Buchanan knocked on, and then it went into Sinfield's hands. The ball moved forward, you could see that from the trajectory of the ball.

The one where Brent Webb was stood thinking he was in Bradford's defensive line, was also correct.

Are the Leeds fans forgetting, in amongst having 2 tries disallowed, that there was a forward pass from Burrow to Jonas Buchanan in the first half for his try? ? ?

Watched the game last night;

The Leeds no try involving Webb - correct decision. Webb clearly makes no attempt to retire behind the play-the-ball and becomes involved in that play.

The JJB knock on - correct decision. JJB knocks the ball forward (and does not re-gather). It is a knock on if it hits the floor or hits an opposing player and cannot be promoted by the opposition or if it hits a team mate or is caught by a team mate.

Bradfords winning try - incorrect decision. There is evidence of foul play in the build up. Penalty to Leeds.

We are 8 games into the season and the top 4 is still pretty close.

Is the referee standard getting to low acceptable levels that the outcome (result) of the game is soon being directly as a result of the officials error or incompetence.

Usually the decisions even themselves out over the game but of the 6 games out of 8 games I,ve been to this season, trying to be impartial I could only remember 1 game where the officials have gone un noticed.

Is this the season where the league is being shaped by the luck of the referee, or do you think the teams performance is still the major factor.

I don't recall the ref having that big an influence on the winning team in most of the games that I've seen.