no tries would be scored if they all went off for ten, therefore he was right

Coaches watch the game in real time and have replays on their laptops.

Why can't the match commissionaire have access when the referee puts an incident on report?

Maybe you don't send the player off for ten minutes (although that would be my choice)
You allow him to stay on until the match commissionaire has reviewed the video and then relay the decision to the match referee. If it's an Ablett type tackle then off he goes.

The problem then would be the referees will begin to defer any big decision to the match commisioner (ala video refs) and then how long until a player scores or sets up a try in the minute between the referall and the decision?

All good ideas in theory, very unlikely to work in reality.

Best option is the introduction of 2 refs, but we need more fulltime refs then.

No unless every game has the tv technology, by that i mean the number of cameras sky has at the games

The issue there then becomes consistency, not the idea itself.

I can't see why, for instance on Friday, when Ganson and the TJs were having their mothers' meeting that the screen can't be used to help them adjudicate. There was one angle in particular where the incident looked horrendous, and I think had Ganson had that view of it he'd have been reaching for the red card rather quickly.

He doesn't need to look though when he's got a video ref who's watching. I can remember quite a few occassions where Ganson has asked the video ref for his opinion about bad challenges which have resulted in red cards but on this occassion he didn't seem to bother. Why not?

I've said though now in hindsight I'm glad it stays on because it kills an excuse for Leeds fans and Eddie Hemmings to use. The whole refereeing continues to be poor though and it never used to bother me but since the referees went professional in 2008 I think standards have dropped rather than increased.

I'd have to agree with you there - since they went full time, the standards aren't acceptable for people who now only have 1 job to concentrate on.

From what we've seen of Ganson in the last few years, I can only think he didn't send him off because he was happy enough that the incident wasn't that severe, but put him on report as an insurance. Of all of our referees, he's usually the one big enough to take the tough calls in the big games. And if that is the case, it's a mistake from him to not walk Ablett.

Every game needs a video ref with the same no of cameras as at the sky games but the money isnt there and we also need to switch to the oz style 2 ref system but as mentioned we are struggling to put out one top class official per game let alone two. There are no sports I can think of where the same sport is officiated so drastically different just because it is on TV or has such big differences between different top-flight national leagues. If these two changes could be implemented then I dont think that there would be as many dodgy decisions being made.

Something the RFL desperately needs to look at is the training structure to promote more officials worthy of being in charge of superleague fixtures on a weekly basis. This is the underlying problem IMO.

The VR had a say in Coley being sent off as has been mentioned.
He also had the main say in Howells being sent off for Quins last season when he tackled Sam in the same way as Ablett. In the Quins game Ganson didn't see it and obtained all his info from the TJ and VR.
Howells was sent off and got four matches.
If you play for Leeds you don't get sent off and get 3 matches.

But they rely on one camera now for the majority of their Monday match reviews don't they?

Sounds a great idea to me, Rogue.
What got me (and I've posted this elsewhere) is that the ref at the Catalans v Wigan game was obviously in conversation with the VR and took the latter's advice before sending Coley off. Why didn't Ganson, the great senderoffer do the same. All we ask for is consistency.

no just the ones he would normally put on report.

Well said, Ted.

We all know how much of a disadvantage being a man down is in RL so I think 10 mins for potentially an accidental offence seems a bit harsh to me. 2 or 3 mins seems more appropriate to me as this still gives time for the incident to be reviewed IMO.

It was always my view that the sanctions in order of severity were:
"on report" -> sin bin -> sending off

Therefore I think this idea should be somewhere between the first two sanctions rather than the last two.

And I'm still annoyed about the Challenge Cup match. It's obvious to me that refs favour the opposition when Wigan are playing. In the league we managed to win at Leeds despite the ref but in the Cup the decisions were equally bad. With a fair ref we would be in the semi on Saturday.