Am I right in thinking that the referee never used to be influenced by the video ref.
That's what on report was for.

Based on that, Vaughan stays on.
But also if the video ref is ruling in disciplinary issues, where's the punishment for the crusher tackle?

All I want to see is consistency, as I'm sure we all do. I don't want to be discussing the refs performance, he should be irrelevant. Unfortunately that's not the case!!

It's obvious that the commentators can hear more of the video ref's deliberations than we can, and they seek like giddy schoolkids when they get to tell us the outcome half a second before it comes on screen. No reason to believe the VRs can hear the commentary, although I suspect there are some situations where there is only one audio feed and it does happen.

One of the commentators lives near me (one of the better oned) The commentators can hear the referee and video ref but the ref and video ref can't hear the commentary.

I should think the involvement of the VR is as much about creating a job for one of the boys as it is for assisting the on field official.The involvement of Thaler for Halton's try was well over the top as we have seen on many more occasions. Why he felt no need to stick his oar in about the crusher tackle is mystifying though.

Both the Lam no try and Halton Try decisions were bizarre. Seemed to take an eternity, for what really were basic decisions. On both occaisions, both sets of players were in agreement on what the outcone would be, and setup will before Thaler reached as decision.

As for the red. I think it is a red based on the rules. But that says more about the rules than the tackle to be honest, and begs the question of why Lomax only got a yellow when he knocked O'Brien out with his shoulder last month.

Exactly and ,unfortunately, lack of consistency leads to suspicions of conspiracy. The game is being played by lads doing their best on pitch but is being ruined by incompetence from top to bottom.