It needn't be horrible to referee. When I'm reffing, if there's team who've decided to be dirty, I find a fairly robust and rapid application of the rules sorts it out fast. By the time you've sinbinned the second man, and given ten penalties on the trot allowing the opposition to score a couple of times, the dirty team will be swearing blind at you (quietly, because that was what the second sin-binning was for), but they'll pack in the silly stuff.

Not the ref's job to be popular with both sides. It's the ref's job to police the game according to the rules, and also de facto to protect the players from those who think RL is an excuse for legalized GBH.

If O'Loughlin had seen a red card a few more times for his endless head shots; or if MM had been sent off a few more times for his lifting and kicking (and by the way, anyone who thinks that kick to Wilkin's head was accidental - I hope you're my trial judge when I rob a bank); and if Wilkin had found himself on the end of a few more penalties or yellows for aggressively challenging the referee; then none of them would do it as much.

Most of the Saints fans I've seen haven't been all that fussed about the Sarginson shot on Wilkin, bit scummy but not against the rules. We're more fussed about Sarginson tackling Percival in the air, O'Loughlin's high shot, McIlorum's late and dangerous tackle, McIlorum kneeing Wilkin....

I'm clearly biased but..... the Sarginson tackle in the air was IMO bad technique on Sarges part, penalty sufficient, should get an official telling off, Lockers high shot was lazy from him rather than malicious (player shifts inside and Lockers is too slow to bend his back) penalty was correct call, and I may be wrong but I saw the Mcilorum knee as a clumsy attempt to con the ref into giving a penalty than anything dirty although he should get a cautioning for lifting a player into a dangerous position.

Nothing on Wilkins cheap head shot on Tomkins after he scored?

You make Wigan's players sound like a bunch of over enthusiastic puppies and Saints as the nasty farmer with a shotgun over his arm.

In a shock, but totally predictable move, the RFL have revealed there are no charges against any player this round bar the spitting incident in the Huddersfield game at the weekend. Ridiculous.

Pfft, I pointed out one Saints cheap shot while saying that at least 2 Wigan players warranted official cautioning for dangerous play, but you carry on as you were and just imagine I wrote something else if that's what keeps you happy.

astonishing!
considering there was plenty going on in our game, and from what i saw a few bits of naughty stuff from the saints-wigan game, it looks the MRP and disciplinary fancy a week off this week

Love it when rivals knock seven shades out of each other, legally or illegally.

Sadly predictable. Presumably the post-McKinnon drive to stop spear tackles and lifting tackles has been dropped, same as virtually any RFL initiative after a short time. By next season I wouldn't be suprised to see the rules and focus on head injuries totally forgotten.

Until somebody else is seriously hurt and then we can all react with shock and sympathy and wish we'd done something.

What I don't get is that apparently there are players on the disciplinary panel yet the needless and cowardly and dangerous things we see are virtually ignored.

The shoulder charge was banned and is stamped on every opportunity even though it was a part of the game a fair proportion of fans loved. Yet late hits on the kicker, lifting/dump tackles, cheap late shots on the passer are all just accepted even though they are in many cases FAR more dangerous. How are pros/ex pros overseeing that?

I would far rather see two props swinging for the rafters toe to toe than tackles like McIlorums, and I'd far rather see a shoulder charge than a late hit on a kicker. But we all know what will be picked up and whatigmored be ignored. The game isn't soft it's just exchanged tough for cheap and that's down to the officials and those in charge of them.

I'd also link it to the point we see about diving creeping in to the game. It's always going to when refs let those kind of cheap shots go. Some may disagree but if I were the coach I would be telling my players to make the most of every cheap shot they received. They are under no obligation to cover for their opponents or mitigate their cheap attacks. For a lift and dump like McIlorums I would tell my players not to move a muscle and make sure the dr is on and take every single precaution necessary. If it takes 20 mins to get him off the pitch so what. My players safety comes first. If that has the by product of drawing attention to the tackle and forcing the ref to make a decision then good. Every bit of illegal play would require a stop in the game with all the pressure that will entail because if the ref doesn't follow the instructions of a doctor or follow safety protocol then the lawyers will have a field day and if the RFL were to neglect their duties again the lawyers would be rubbing their hands with glee.

Eventually the only way to stop the game turning in to a mess would be to stop these incidents hy penalising them out of existence.

Spot on Smokey.

Especially re the diving issue. It's now a regular occurrence for the ref to ask the VR to review an incident when a player stays down injured and then often gives a penalty. But that situation only occurs if the player stays down injured. That's encouraging diving. As is the issue at the play the ball. We see lots of holding down and interference that isn't penalised and so you've now got players having to "dive" in order to get the referees attention to actually give the penalty.

It's how it came about in football too. Players were getting fouled/obstructed in the penalty area but not getting a penalty because the refs were terrified of giving such a big decision. So they started making it obvious to the ref they'd been fouled.

The same is happening in RL now, and if I were a head coach I'd be telling my players that every single time they reckon they've been hit even slightly high or late to stay down and force the ref to do something. And I'd be telling them to make it absolutely bloody obvious to the ref that they've been held down at the play the ball. If that means diving then so be it.

The refs (and obviously their leaders) bring many of these issues on themselves (hence the problem with dissent in football) or at least make the problem a lot worse by not penalising or enforcing the rules when they should.

rlAlex Thompson Injury v Rochdalerl

So what's the VT jury verdict on this nasty piece of work? Watch it a couple of times, gets worse each time.

That's a shocker. He deserves a long ban.

Horrible. I'm trying to think of any reason or justification for the Rochdale player to be doing what he is. But I can't.

Depending on his previous record he needs a very, very long ban of at least 20 games. Maybe a year. It's one of those that brings the prospect of sine die into consideration in my opinion.

A bit of a side issue but I'd also be wanting the RFL to take a look at other Rochdale games and see if their players have been using this kind of grip/hold as a tactic or whether it's a one off.