That doesn't even make sense? What are you on about?

"Poor decisions" in YOUR opinion does not mean you are right. Yes, of course Child got 99% of the decisions right; he makes them, without a break, for every player and every play, for 80 minutes. Seems stating the obvious. What percentage do YOU claim are "very poor", then? You give 4 specific instances and even if you are correct then that would be 4 out of many hundreds. It's you who needs to get a grip.

I have no need to watch the game again, much less to please you. I watched it as a neutral and didn't see anything much to carp about in the way the game was reffed overall, and that being the case, there was nothing much, or else I would have seen it. Unlike you though I don't watch it simply to confirm my preconceptions that the referee will be crap, I actually watch the game, and don't obsess about the refereeing. It is bad enough listening to Stevo doing that. And he makes a fool of himself too.

Referees will always get some calls wrong. Some are more prolific at it. The offside complaint is laughable- talking to an opposition supporter last week we were commenting on how ALL teams seem to be bending the rule on this one more and more- some are better at "getting away with it".
These rants from coaches invariably happen when a team has lost. Cunningham will be fined and thats all the notice the RFL will take. They may take more notice of the content If he were to come out and say it after a win..... Because of course Saint helens, or any other team, have never been on the right side of a dubious decision have they??? Perhaps he should watch it back and check that one....

I would suggest that some of the comments on this thread are indicative of why so few people volunteer to become refs.

Also, as so many times, I disagree with FA, in this thread I have to humbly take my hat off to his sound arguments. Saddened, try refereeing. I have and it is not easy. You have a second to make a decision often in a poor place to see all the factors obvious from the sideline.

Blindly supporting the referees out of some moral crusade isn't any better than me complaining though is it? You conveniently forget all the points I make then drag it down to personal insults all the time. Can you not understand Cunningham's frustrations? It's been more than two full games since a side was ruled to be offside against Saints and in that time Saints have been ruled offside about 15 times. There are referees in SL of a decent standard but it's an issue that does need raising. Another point you conveniently forget is that Sharp agrees with Cunningham (Thus making your claims that referees are nigh on perfect look slightly silly), but claims to not be able to do anything about it.

On the 99% thing, I think people forget just how many decisions a referee actually makes during the course of a game. Let's analyse one three-man tackle where the player is held up as an example.

Firstly, is all the contact legal? Have any of the defending players strayed onto the head? Did the third man who came in at the legs do so properly, or did he cannonball? Is any undue pressure being placed on the limbs of the ball carrier? Has the ball carrier used his arms or knees in any way that constitutes foul play?

When is the tackle completed? Do I call held now, or do I give it a second to see if he is going to offload? Has he retained possession in the contact or has the ball come loose?

Then after the "held" call:

Are all the defenders moving away in a timely manner? Are the markers square? Has the ball carrier retained possession all the way through the process? Has he played the ball correctly? Where are all the defenders at the moment the ball is played?

Now repeat that for however many play the balls there are in a match. That doesn't include any incidents in open play like knock-ons, forward passes, obstruction or late/off the ball challenges.

If you say that each play in the game carries with it an average of ten decisions then analyse how many of those referees get wrong, 99% isn't an unreasonable figure for accuracy.

Cunningham [isays[/i that Sharp agrees with him; I very much doubt that he would agree that he agrees, even if he did agree when speaking to Cunningham. Do you agree?

I don't think anyone is saying refs are perfect- I think most are agreeing they are human beings.
But let me get this right- you are complaining that Saint helens are being penalised for breaking the rules, and that referees are deliberately failing to penalise other teams for breaking the same rule against saints.....
Wow.... What exactly are you suggesting? A conspiracy?
. Perhaps it's just that saints are offside in a way that interferes with play in the eyes of said refs- and that actually different refs are being consistent in their interpretation of that......

Now I agree that the refereeing could improve - but I think that's down to the way the game has changed and crucially the way the players are being coached to play the game rather than a drop in quality of the standards of the referee. They now have too much to look out for.
I also get what sharp is saying that with only a handful of referees he can't put two men on the field as in aus. So what can he do? Give the men with the flags more direct responsibility to ease the burden on the referee.

I agree.

Great straw man. Your attempt to convert reasoned analysis and unbiased observation into "blind" support or worse a "moral crusade" ffs is risible.


I am discussing refereeing standards and associated points. If you make a stupid or unreasonable point and I point it out (e.g. as above) then while it may be blunt, it is an attack on your point not a personal attack. As you bloody well know.


Yes, Saints are not the Saints of old, their tactics have reduced to a much less entertaining and less complex version, and the realisation seems to be dawning that this is his doing. He has achieved a transformation in playing standards and in particular style that neither he nor Saints fans wanted. So yes, I can see that. The trouble is, he is trying to deflect blame by scrabbling around for scapegoats. He may have had a couple of fair points too, which could reasonably be discussed, but they are buried in his ranting.


Unless you can produce video evidence showing that those decisions were plainly wrong, then that would be a surprising statistic, but what would it say about refereeing? Presumably the two games were refereed by two different sets of officials. Unless you are saying that both sets deliberately resolved to cheat Saints by declining to give any offside, whereas giving the opponents a string of offsides which were not? Is that what you are claiming? A multi-official conspiracy never to award offside penalties to Saints? And why, pray, are they doing this to Saints?

Occam might suggest that the opponents just maybe were well-disciplined on those occasions and never gave the ref cause to blow, but I expect you would totally discount that.


You deliberately twist what i said by using the phrase "nigh on perfect". The FACT is they DO get almost all decisions right, as has been explained in another response, but that is not of course to claim they are "nigh on perfect" in the sense you set up is another straw man. And for just one thing, getting decisions technically right is just one facet of officiating a game. As I need to point it out in response (although again you bloody well know it) other skills such as man management, communication etc. are just as key to being a top ref. Darren Lockyer was one of the greatest halfbacks I have ever seen and few if any have played the game better. He was utterly outstanding. Was he "nigh on perfect"? Er, no. Please try to stick to the text and put the straw away back in your barn.

I do not for even a second believe that Sharpe agrees with Cunningham. Which, before you trundle out the straw again, does NOT mean I think Sharpe beliefs his officials are nigh-on perfect! What rot. Whatever Sharpe may have said in private informal conversations with Cunningham should have stayed private and it is crass of Cunningham to flounder about trying to make trouble for Sharpe and cause a rift between him and the officials. I hope he gets a substantial fine for his stupid remarks. And of course you admit you don't even believe Sharpe meant that, whatever he said, so why you made a point that you don't even believe is one for you to answer.

I won't go over the same points again.

How are you finding lower league RL? I must admit I'm missing Bradford, feels like there is a gap in the schedule at the moment. Confident of returning via the mini league thing at the end of the season?

Your fashionably faux hysteria & assumed role as spokesperson of the masses are 2 things that pee me off. You say Child is unquestionably struggling. I say he isn't, a number on here say he isn't. Therefore you are wrong.

I am the spokesperson for the people. People love me on here. You should have seen the reaction the last time they tried to ban me, people were protesting about it in Iran.

Maybe there is a god after all. But you are using the word "points" rather loosely


It's certainly partly the feelgood factor of finally appearing to have some stability after years of utter chaos, but yes, for me especially it has been fantastic, the best part is revisiting old haunts, brings back so many memories.

I've said from the start that we would struggle to finish higher than a seasoned team like Leigh, where the players are on first name terms, but turns out finishing 2nd may be no worse or better than top. I am sure that if we make a playoff game then on our day we can certainly win it but nobody could be confident, on the contrary you would have to say that the odds are stacked against any Championship club, even us, given all the usual factors. But you never know, and by then we will be able to give lower SL teams a decent game if all fit, so if we run into one which is struggling with form and confidence then we might turn them over.

What I do know is that your team doesn't win then it's down to the match officials especially if something major is at stake.

By using the " logic" of certain posters, the reason that Wigan lost to Hull KR, 2 weeks after trouncing them, was the referee, and Childs in particular!

I must have understood that correctly, because there is no CONSITANCY in the results.