Ask any ex pro or anyone who has played sport at the highest level and i would guess that everyone of them tells you you have to adapt to the referee.

I watched quite a bit of the six nations. In virtually every game commentators talked about , " refereeing interpretations" particularly in respect of the ruck and maul area. They talked about Irelands choke tackle ( which is where you tackle the player and hold him up so that he cannot fall to the ground) as an area that had different interpretaions.

When Ireland beat England it was because they played to the rules better.

In football every week you see the pundits commentating on penalty and foul play. Every week you hear them say that, " to the letter of the law that should have been a red or , i have seen penalties given for less, last week the ref gave a penalty for that but this week did not". That is interpretation.

The referee in every game is a variable depending on interpretation, new directives, what was discussed in the refs meeting or what side of the bed they got out of.

Players have to be ready to respond to that within the 80 minutes of the game.

I can see on Monday our players thinking we will play offside or slow the PTB and being penalised to death.

We have to learn to adapt quicker or alternatively dont play so badly and put ourselves on the back foot in the first few minutes.

There is a difference between interpretation of a rule in a range of circumstances and not policing the rules at all.
We will have to agree to disagree on this one Durham.

Perhaps, when you come to the SRD v Hudds game at our place, we can have a bucket collection to send Childs to Australia to join Roby

I would pay good money to see that happen, if only!!!!

Disagreement is fine.

But i always think of what Barrie Mc Dermott said in his autobiography and like it or not it is true.

"If you are not cheating you are not trying hard enough".

The reality is that you have to bend the rules to get what you want Salford did it better than us.

Sorry but you have got that part wrong. I've read that in James Child's autobiography

i don't expect any referee to be "sympathetic" towards us, i expect to see a referee who is neutral for both sides and fair.

i don't give 2 hoots who refs us as long as he does it fairly!

He was neutral.

He reffed both sides the same ie played No offside rule, no markers square rule and no slowing down the PTB rule.

The problem was we did not exploit it as well as Salford

Which means as a pro RL ref he isn't doing his job correctly and enforcing the rules of the game !!!

Which is exactly my original point - he's a poor ref as he doesn't do the job right !!!

balls to us exploiting anything, he, as should any ref, apply the rules of the game, it's what he's bloody well paid for !!!

So what do we do ,

Cry and complain like the team do or say we will just have to take advantage of it.

That is life RL refs are shiite.

If you dont like it then you may as well give up watching RL because it has been thus for a long time., There is no sign it is getting better.

So there is no point whinging you just have to get on with it.

This is more serious than i thought.

The Brough disease has now become airborne as well as being spread via computer keyboards.

for crying out loud i don't intend doing anything and i certainly won't give up watching, i was merely offering an opinion on an internet forum about a particular referee for others to discuss...fair enough you don't think he's a bad ref others do ..this isn't about US or OUR players in OUR match it's about 1 particular referee in general.

Daz - Durham is one of those fans whos happiest when he's moaning- he was here all the time at the start of the season then he was one of those we were discussing were nowhere to be seen- suddenly he's back.
It was probably 1997 when he last said anything positive about Hudds.