Clearly?

Did you have another camera angle not available to Smith or the rest of the viewing public?

The only clear thing about it was a clear case of "benefit of doubt"

No the one were he got It it down. Or doesnt that fit In with all the [ibull[/i

I think we have had the three worst video-referee decisions since it's introduction this year:
Early in season Leeds Rhinos given 'try' (was it JJB?) - even he got up and shook his head!
Then the Liam Watts given 'try' at Castleford.
Now the Roby 'try'.
These are not cases where there is an argument both ways, or that depend on the interpretation of a rule. They are all simply and clearly wrong when looked at within the rules of the game.

Its amazing what biterness success causes. Emmitts "No Try" and Robys try evened themselves out. Both were unclear, to the letter of the law both should have been given benefit of the doubt.

watts scored fair and square

best quote ever .that phrase made full metal jacket for me

I posted this yersterday on our board

Im pretty sure the referees genuinely do not know the rules

As a crusaders player was tackling roby as soon as roby made contact with the ground the tackle was complete, when it left his hand backwards he lost it after the tackle was complete..simple decision

Its amazing he decison was roby never lost possession with the ball which is a blatant lie, eddie seemed fascinated with it going backwards but the tackle was already complete

I don't understand some people in here. It "evened" out. You mean the emmit no try, where the ball was held up off the deck? unless the ball is two foot long, it was not a try.

The roby decision was either a knock on, or double movement. Take your pick

Still seething about it as it was the match breaker. However, as Stevo's wont to say 'read it in the papers', and before people start slagging off Stuart Cummings they might like to consider that his problem might be that he can't get the staff.

Not talking about the Emmitt no try, but I dont think you even know what the benefit of the doubt rule is. Unclear doesnt equal try... No way could benefit of the doubt be applied to the Roby try. Get over yourself and your 'success', that has nothing to do with a shocking decision.

Spot on, it looks like the defender may have got his arm under the ball but you cant be certain with what was shown that he did, therefoe it should have been try-benefit of the doubt.

The roby 'try' was a shocker though, as bad as the watts 'try' earlier this season.

It was a knock on and a bad decision, The Emmit 'no try' was correct,no way did he get that ball down so that was 1 bad call by the Video Ref..Silverwood and his 2 flag carrying spectators made many bad calls for both sides, He could spoil a great final next week, but Smith, Thaler, Alibert and co are no better

Watts scored, roby didn't. They are nothing alike

The ball was not played correctly (which the ref asked the video ref to check) and the watts knocked on.

It wasnt a try.