1bit·ter adj \ˈbi-tər\
Definition of BITTER

hard to bear; grievous; distressful: a bitter sorrow.

causing pain; piercing; stinging: a bitter chill.

characterized by intense antagonism or hostility: bitter hatred.

hard to admit or accept: a bitter lesson.

resentful or cynical: bitter words.

Bent ham easy

I posted this topic 5 years ago - interesting reading in 2015 in view of some of the most baffling VR decisions against Wigan in the Leeds match at Headingley and again in the Grand Final.
Out of interest, it showed the knock on in " Superzoom" in the highlights on Wigan TV ( the Club End of Season Awards Night Part 2).
It was even more clear than ever that the ball travelled forward from McGuire's hand before inadvertently hitting his thigh. Cummins commented on the night that unless he deliberately kicked the ball, it had to be a knock on. Why did Bentham and Silverwood allow the try to stand? I honestly believe 99% of impartial spectators would judge this to have been a blatant knock on.
It might also be interesting if Bilko could provide some updated statistics - see page 1.
It also begs the question why did they not use the Superzoom facility on the night?

What Cummins said was that if it went forward off his leg then it's a knock on. You said that it travelled forward until it hit his thigh, but a player can't knock on onto himself, so it's ultimately where the ball lands off him. For me, that was backwards.

99% of times when a player fumbles the ball like that, a knock on is given, even though the ball eventually lands behind the player. There are sometimes instances where the ball may even land a foot or two behind the player but a knock on is given - Stevo would probably say it was the player's "momentum" that then took him in front of the ball!
Some knock ons may thus judged to be rather harsh but they do tend to be given - just not in Wigan's favour ( or against Leeds) in crucial games where there is a certain VR on duty.

Cummings's final view was that the try should be given - which tallied with the opinions of James Child, Ben Thaler, Richard Silverwood and, yes, Phil Bentham.

Perhaps someone might like to comment on this thread about Bentham's refereeing in the 2011 Challenge Cup Final, by far the most controversial cup final performance in recent years?

You forgot to mention the baffling decisions in the Leeds game at the DW. The Matty Smith knock on that was missed and the try of the season disallowed because Joel Tomkins made a defensive misread and threw his hands up in the air to claim a penalty.

In that match at the DW, Leeds had forward passes leading up to two of their tries and the no try of the season had a forward pass prior to the touch down too.

Bentham showed his incompetance/bias twice in the 2014 season.
First in the Pettybourne/Wood incident where the Wire man hit Eddy four times whilst the Wigan man was just flailing to stop the punches landing whilst never throwing one himself. Bentham should have sent off Wood and not taken action against Pettybourne. The binning of both was either complete ineptitude or bias.

Second was his decision or lack of it in the Hohaia/Flower event. Both men should have been sent off. Hohaia for racing 25 mtrs to smash his elbow/forearm into Flower's face and Ben for his couple of punches in retaliation. Just to send off one of them was, again, either total incompetance or bias.

The RFL owed the Wigan club and their supporters an explanation as to why their players were subjected to that kind of violence and little or no action was taken against the perpetrators.
Bentham proved in both instances that he is unfit to referee due to his inabilty to manage stress situations.

I don't blame the ref/touch judge/video ref for what was an embarrassing moment for the game in that Moon try being allowed. I blame the ridiculous rule that the ref on the field has to send it up as a try/no try which basically meant the video ref couldn't rule out what was clearly, and always has been a knock on! It was a call that would go out way 99 times out of a 100 in the past but with this new system they feel compelled to back the field ref.

It needs binning for the start of next year.

Hate to say this but Union on this is way ahead if us. If that had occurred under the world cup union games the ref would have asked check it. And has an input in the decision making. By giving a decision on field it makes even dubious decisions a try.

Needs changing as well as foul play. By that anything worthy of a red card can be checked by a video ref and player dismissed.

For example and this is an example please do not throw in a MM did this or Faz did that but in the 2013 Westwood hit Green and should have gone straight red. Those should be dealt with in the game even after the tackle. Union uses this too often on all things almost but for deliberate foul play it works well. Also we need to go back to forward passes another area where union is ahead of us. we might not have a lot to learn from the playing side but officiating has a lot to learn from Union.

I used to laugh at Union because of the knock ons they let people away with but it's turned full circle and we're now the ones that should be laughed at. That was a shambles that Moon try but they've got themselves in a spot where the video ref can't overturn an onfield error because there's the slimmest chance that he may be wrong.

I say that but they didn't have an issue turning the McGuire no try in to a try when he ground the ball whilst going in to touch against us in our last game at Headingley. Show me somebody who tells me they were 100% certain McGuires midfriff hadn't touched the line as the ball was put down and I'll show you a bullsh*tter.

The video ref should be falling on the side of the evidence in front of him, not the word of his mate on the field.

Agreed

If we are going to analyse tries scored with suspect or forward passes in the build up the list would be endless.
My real point was that fans of all clubs tend to remember the decisions that go against them whilst forgetting the ones they profited from. After we beat saints the week before the GF a saints fan gave a list of poor obstruction calls they had been on the wrong end of this season while failing to mention the worst one of the season against Castleford from which they were the beneficiaries.

The point that quite a few of us are trying to make is that in the last couple of months of the season Wigan were very harshly treated by the VR ( and one person in particular). There will always be 50/50 calls to be made by the on-field ref, some of these will go your way, some against. On-field refs will also make genuine mistakes and not spot knock-ons, forward passes, ball steals etc. Again some of these will go for you, some against. On-field refs have to make snap decisions and will understandably not get everything right. VRs have the benefit of numerous replays and camera angles and should thus come to a decision that concurs with the views of the majority who know the laws of rugby. With quite a lot of knock-ons that are given, the ball actually ends up going backwards, but the initial movement out of the hands was forward. Some of these are harsh, but they are almost always given - or they have been in all my experience ( 50 years) of watching rugby.
What has been so galling in both the Headingley game and the Grand Final is that they weren't 50/50 decisions that went against Wigan and for Leeds. The VRs came to a decision that the vast majority of people (and not just Wigan fans) with a knowledge of rugby would disagree with. Were they 90/10 or even 99/1 (Sinfield's at Headingley, McGuire's at Old Trafford)?
One must ask the question why? What is the common denominator? Various theories .....

I dislike Westwood as much as the next man but that was never a red.