Actually it's open to interpretation as until the scrum is properly formed then a full penalty can be given. If the lad had not binded correctly then a full scrum was NOT properly formed.

You can see this in ruleSection 12 Pushing (4)

It is permissible for forwards to push once the scrum has been correctly formed but if it moves an appreciable distance to the disadvantage of any one team before the ball is put in then the Referee shall order the scrum to reform in its original position.'"

Joe I'm a volunteer ref myself. I wasn't having a pop was just pointing out comments made by players involved in the game

The penalty was awarded for having more than 7 backs - hence it is a full penalty (the scrum was never formed correctly and therefore a differential penalty would be incorrect). The players had been warned on several occassions.

Whats your opinion of the first incident Mr Cobb

Joe, is he one of your proteges? You have tried to excuse one part of his actions by giving a totally nonsensical reason. There were not seven backs the loose forward had his hands on the second row, the referees signalled "not binding" and made no reference to the number in the scrum. He got the offence correct but the penalty wrong.

If you want to retain any credibility as a development officer then take your head out of your backside and admit that he cocked up and while you are doing so explain his decision not to shift the thug.

If that's directed at me for quoting you, Rob... fair comment, wasn't meaning you, but was meaning the more general comments including using Youtube to have a go at an official.

Refs (a) interpret what they see, which is always at full speed, from one angle... hence what we can rewind over and over again and see as an elbow shot, in real time looks like a collision resulting in contact to the head... a penalty, definitely... but the ref is running sideways towards the touchline, there are four advancing defenders but the hit comes from the touchline, infield, on the 'wrong' side of the defensive line. Could the ref definitely see in that one chance that it was such a bad shot? Certain enough to straight red someone in a final? From the decision, clearly not.

Refs also (b) give the best decision they can on the basis of what they've seen. In the second clip, maybe he could have picked the (missing) high tackle on the fullback, but that would have been a real judgement call, and a scrum to Stanningley was a nailed-on certainty, so that's not a surprising call. Besides, it looks like the ref had already made the call for teh knock on, so it's a scrum anyway because the tackle comes when the game is halted. The Stanningley loose isn't bound, and is clearly guilty of a penalty office.

Refs also (c) sometimes get it wrong. My understanding of the laws is that it should have been a differential penalty. JoeCobb's argument, that the scrum wasn't properly formed, is arguable but not how I understand it. I don't know if the Staningley player questioned the ref's parentage when he got pinged, in which case its a full penalty, and the ref's only mistake is not to signal that. Certainly the loose and scrum half say something, and the Stanningley 14 has words. In any case, the ref's penalty signal, albeit 'not binding', is ALSO not the arm-waving signal for a differential penalty.

But even if the ref IS wrong, it happens, and it happens a lot less than player error. Last weekend we were six points up with 3 minutes left, and my centre got 'drop-goal' on the brain... tried one on the first tackle, gave the opposition a 20 metre restart, almost cost us the win. But it's not all over the internet saying he's a muppet and should be banned by the RFL. Why? because it was a lad, making a genuine error of judgement. If all his team-mates called him a c*** and we post stuff online to that effect, he'd probably not come back next week.

Likewise, the ref is just a lad, making his judgement calls. If my centre doesn't come back next week, We'll shift someone off the bench. If the ref doesn't come back, there is no game. Full stop.

Your embarrassing attempt at trying to pretend the ref got it right is worse than his error in the first place - at least he did it in the heat of the moment?!

By all means stick up for the fella (because, whilst what he did was shockingly poor, I do have some sympathy for him) but don't lie on his behalf to try and win an argument?!

The two paragraphs from Fatboy's Limb are a damn sight nearer the mark than the excusist ramble from Wembley 71.

I was brought up to admit mistakes and retain credibility, I would be embarrassed if one of my colleagues jumped in trying to defend me with a load of garbage.

I've never heard of the ref, never met him, he's not a colleague. I just don't think its appropriate for amateur clubs to slate volunteer officials online.

Doubtless you're the perfect match official who never gets anything wrong.

I'm afriad the Junior Ref system is poor. Usually full of dweeds who was no good at the game themselves. Sames goesfor linesmen.

All referees get things wrong occasionally; I got things wrong due to not having three hundred and sixty degree vision , poor positioning, lapses of concentration etc, I even got things wrong and nobody noticed. When you do make a mistake you hope it doesn't have a major bearing on the result as in the incident we a re discussing. This one was obviously recoverable which is the worst aspect of it all.

I've seen lots of good young ref's, in fact it's this type of response and the lack of respect from the parents on the touch line, that spoils most junior games not the ref.

No Ref no game.....as Alexander says Simples

It's also this sort of comment and lack of respect from the touchline, why local societies have difficulty retaining new referees young and not so young. Every society has a development officer - In Leigh's case Joe Cobb assisted by Terry Sykes and Chris Waywell - who work damn hard recruiting and, with the help of the RFL's regional develoment officers, training and advising these new referees. And, like players, some will develop quicker than others, and some will become better than others, but they all deserve the opportunity to progress as far as they can and should be given the due respect they deserve.