I don't think that it's just a T.V thing.

Last week Wakefield had a try disallowed for a nothingness, the Ref’s have had a directive from our glorious leaders.

They really need to review it because it has become farcical.

It is working extremely well, and everyone knows where they stand. The only mystery is how the coaches, who Sky said were all in on the deal of the new interpretaion, tolertae their players still doing these things when they should KNOW that they will automatically concede a penalty.

In some cases, i can sympathise with people who argue that some specific instance was not that much of an obstruction, and SHOULD not have been a penalty. But very few argue that the CALLS have been wroing, under the new interpretation. Therefore there was no excuse for the players having given away the pen. It's a bit like driving at 40 because you "don't agree with" the 30 limit, and whingeing when you get a ticket.

This is getting beyond a joke now!

Powell and O'Loughlin were penalised for doing just that against Huddersfield the other week and it was defended by the refs on Twitter. I don't think "behind" has anything to do with it, you can obstruct someone from any angle it seems.

I thought the Broughton no try was ridiculous. The supposedly obstructed player had no chance of getting to Brough so even if a player was in his way it can hardly be obstruction. He wasn't within cooee to quote Stevo.

The whole thing needs looking at by a technical panel of some description, but doing that would require the RFL accepting that there's a problem.

It's a shame when a really cracking try is chalked off because of obstruction when the 'obstructed' player doesn't have a cat in hells chance of altering the outcome.

Isn't it.

Hopefully that attacking player won't obstruct next time so they try can stand.

Nail.

Head.

Case closed.

How do you obstruct a defender if you don't prevent him from moving where he wants to?

Have teams suddenly altered what they are doing mid season, or have those officials in certain departments decided they are to set what is and isn't to be interpreted differently?

There is plenty going on behind the scenes that is being played out with some of the ridiculous decision that are being made on the field.

I look forward to players in the defensive line doing star jumps in front of kickers, sort of like they do in water polo.

I am always worried about changes in interpretation that happen mid season. I would much rather have consistency unless something earth shatteringly new takes place (like in the famous heading the ball season). An old adage in politics is that difficult circumstances make for bad laws. In rugby league it seems to be that not thinking through the consequences leads to long posts.

Surely there is something wrong when you go from 1 penalty max for obstruction to about 5 a game (like last night).

Something has to change, either the rule or the way the players are attacking.

It is really spoiling some of the games.

Just seen the game video.

Broughton try should have been given. No Leeds defenders obstructed from getting to ball carrier or effecting a tackle. Terrible decision, especially given that the very minimal contact was in centre field.

Obstruction call on Briscoe equally ridiculous. Briscoe doesn't change the line of his run. He doesn't deliberately move to step across Brough or push him. Two converging runs meet and the bounce of the ball took it away from Brough and closer to Briscoe.

Briscoe didn't have to change the line of his run because the ball came to him Brough having to move across Briscoe was why the contact happened.

On the one view of the grounding shown on Leeds website, it looks as if Briscoe grounded it correctly but would need to see it from another angle for hand on ball without bouncing it.