Agreed we are the most guilty of the top clubs of giving away penalties and we must address that. The range of offences we give away is scary and if it was one or two offences we might have a chance of changing it quickly but I guess we conceeded about 15 pens today and they were for 7 or 8 different things. Not good.

But you're assuming that Bentham either thought "That went over but I'm going to say it didn't because I don't like Huddersfield" or "I'm not sure whether that went over so I'll just say it didn't" when he might have thought "That clearly missed so I'm confident that don't need to refer it".

There's no reason to think the video ref could have made a better job of it having seen the camera angles shown on TV.

How can you say the other incorrect decisions are meaningless just because they were earlier in the game? Do you have some way of knowing what would have happened in the following plays if the incorrect decision hadn't been made? If you have then Derren Brown may want to speak to you.

I've been requested to post this here, so...

It makes me laugh when I see people like Rogue's with his say what you see attitude or Danny Brough's "What's missing about that?" opinion. Whilst I wish I could clear this up using elaborate mathematical equations and physics, I think a basic knowledge of geometry and common sense will do.

This all revolves around why the two angles appear to show different outcomes, this is simple - perspective! And how people point to how the ball looks inside the sticks without even thinking of perspective just beggars belief.

rlrl

From this angle, we can see the moment the ball is kicked, it is roughly 6ft from the approximate spot of the post - using the pitch lines (I've gone over them in white). The yellow asterisk is where the ball would be on the try line (all measurements are of course approximate).

rlrl

So from behind the goal, the thing that is catching everyone out is how the ball looks inside the sticks for most of its journey. We can now use the same reference spots from the previous photo (I have changed the hue so the lawn lines appear sharper). We know the ball is 6ft outside the sticks, but look - it already appears inside the sticks from this point. The fact is that the ball needs to make up 6ft of ground.

rlrl

Here is the true perspective of the top of the sticks. At this point, given as I say I am not qualified to work out distance x time etc, we rely on common sense. Does the ball appear inside the corridor of the lines? Of course that is only one still and proves nothing, but I would say think about this perspective and the reference points I have given and watch the video yourself. I have examined it and I am very confident it didn't


And that is why, on that angle ^ the ball looks to be sneaking in (if you imagine the lines not to be there)...


rlrl

...but on this angle the ball appears wide.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong, but I would hope others would think a bit harder about what they think they saw before berating Phil Bentham. I believe the ball missed by by a comfortable enough distance and Phil Bentham was stood in a perfect spot to see it. He is not stupid (banter aside) he would have known the connotations by going up to the video ref, if he was not 100% he would have used that, enormous pressure off his shoulders, but he also knows the video could give false impressions, so he must have been 100% confident.

Excellent post - but I have no idea whether it was a goal or not.

More importantly how would a video ref been able to decide............

No goal

Thought Bentham had a fairly decent game

Apart from never, when in this country has the video ref EVER handed the decision back to the on field ref?

Sorry mate, not having that....there was no way there was that many fans sat behind them posts in that top pic, did you photoshop them in? I bet if I zoom in it'll be Elvis.

But, Walsh didn't miss. Brough did.

You need to join bentham at specsavers harry, when did anybody say this??? Think it's time for bed for you.

You sure about that because nobody else is, or looking at your previous posts just doing a bit of trolling?

What's the problem? Brough missed.

I've seen plenty of posts saying it missed. For instance, the one directly above this one. Hudds fans obviously know it didn't miss. Bentham is biased against them. We know this as they had a thread running for two weeks stating as much when they didn't beat us earlier in the season.

Sorry I slightly misread your post, but the point still stands. How can you say that any of the decisions are meaningless because each decision changes everything that happens after it.

Ferres gets sent off (rightly) you concede a try.
Brough had 4 attempts FOUR in front of the posts every time IN FRONT OF THE POSTS.
One camera angle has him missing, possibly the same angle Bentham saw it at.

Walsh from further out, one attempt, sails through the middle.

Yet Bentham robs you?

Don't get me wrong I'm gutted at the result but to attribute that loss to to PB is ignoring the fact you couldn't close the game down yourselves.