He lands on the ground steadies himself and fails to ground the ball correctly. Who is to say he'd ground it otherwise. Your simply presuming.

National leagues have different points scoring rules and the NRL golden point thats not the same as different technical rules. In football everygame played between that 90 mins are played using the same rules.

Exactly. Penalty tries are given on the presumption the attacker would have scored without illegal interference.

Seeing as that's the case here, it should have been a penalty try.

Let me spell it out. If you remove Fox from the situation, the hugely massively overwhelming probability, pretty much a guarantee, is that Hodgson - with the ball safely in his hands and travelling over the line in a safe direction - will score. Fox tackles him ILLEGALLY and Hodgson ONLY fails to land cleanly or ground the ball due to Fox tackling him IN THE AIR and pushing him into touch. Without Fox, none of that would have happened.

I'd have been interested to see the reaction if Hodgson had taken out Fox in the exact same circumstances.

The last sentence says it all. If it was the other way round every hull KR fan would be saying it should have been a penalty try. I'm not saying the KR fans are making things up, just that they are ( obviously ) biased as any fan would be towards thier own team. I doubt there are many neutrals who would disagree that a penalty try should have been awarded!

Despite 3 Super League coaches stating they thought it was a legal tackle!

Yep, you can't tackle somebody whilst he's still in the air. He did, therefore penalty.

He commited this penalty whilst Hodgson was in the act of scoring. If he hadn't commited that penalty then I would say (with the evidence available) that the overwhelming probablility was that he would have scored. So IMO a penalty offence was commited that directly stopped an almost certain try. So a penalty try should have been awarded.

He went for the ball it's a contact sport what do you want him to do?

You cant tackle a player in the air

so hudds did nothing wrong all game then and was good little soldiers bull s'@t

Wow, what a way to miss the point of the debate.

The three coaches showed perhaps whats wrong with English RL...they dont actually know the rules!

I will have to wait and watch it on SKY but i think that both decisions should have been penalties possibly with sin binnings.

I remain sceptical about them being penalty tries as the rules stand because you almost never see them in RL. I think their needs to be clarification on this and that a professional foul to stop a try scoring situation should probably be a penalty try.

I've had a think about this and I think you're correct. The referee ('s VR and on field) has to find a reason that it's [inot[/i a try. Hodgson pretty much [idid[/i score a try with what was (I think) illegal interference (suffered with that myself, counselling cast a flipping fortune). As a Rovers fan, I'll take the draw! 5.62353515625:5