Back to Bentham, I thought he had a decent game. Thought he got most decisions right and, most importantly, he managed to keep a lid on things after Flower's dismissal. Think both sides and - dare I say it - both coaches deserve some credit for the latter too.

No matter what happens referees can't win with any decisions. At the moment though Bentham seems to be the best of a bad bunch.

He did well to control things on Saturday and there are several referees at the moment who would have lost control.

I've been a season ticket holder at Wigan for 40 years and was disgusted at Flower for the second shot on his opponent. I for one wouldn't care if he never played for us again. Rugby is tough enough without that.

Why don,t you just chain up the real Ben Flower to that big metal rugby ball in tesco car park, it would be cheaper. Bentham had a fairly decent game compared to the Silverwood Standard.

Bloody hell mate.

That's not much of a comparison.

I saw Thierry Alibert have a few decent games if we're applying the Silverwood Standard.

Lance pleads guilty and gets a match which really should have been a red on the day. Any player who is banned should have had a red and the system is a cop out. I knew this when watching in the ground. Sounds harsh to some but lance should have been carded even If on a stretcher. He got this wrong but think he could have had some help.

agreed. there was one replay at the ground which clearly showed the forearm smash. the game should have been 12 v 12.
For such important decisions it is imperative that a VR is used.

None of this is any kind of defence of flower, just that both players should have been carded

I think he got 78 minutes actually! and as their key play maker that was enough

Not correct Wigan as a team were a Man light and should have been same for Saints. Lance aint no playmaker and wasnt a big loss to Saints.

I think you need to go and have a look at what the Saints fans have been saying about Hohaia all season (and previous seasons for that matter!) before you start spouting the 'losing their only recognised halfback' mantra. I can't think of a single fan who regards him as a half and clearly neither does the club given they have just gone out and signed Burns. That's before we get into the times he's been available and they've preferred to play other non specialist options such as Wilkins and Wellens ahead of him!

Can anybody tell me who the 2 video refs were on Saturday?
Also, I've not seen a replay so I only have a foggy recollection of the review of the incident, was the full incident looked at from start to finish by the refs or was it just the punch from Flower?

I have refrained from posting on any of the topics recently as I am working in Austria and only saw the game in a bar without any sound ( a blessing in disguise?!). Perhaps some of you could enlighten me on several incidents which were not clear from just seeing the game on TV:

Did Pettybourne actually knock on when Wellens very demonstratively hinted he had - and which led to a scrum from which Saints scored their crucial first try? Sky normally show an incident like this in the numerous replays after a try has been scored but I do not recall seeing anything ( and of course I couldn't hear what Eddie and Stevo were saying). It is these 50/50 decisions which can be crucial to the outcome to a tight game - possession in your opponent's 22 gifted to a team.

Charnley was penalised when chasing a kick in the Saints 22 and from the resulting penalty Saints were marched upfield and scored their final try. Hicks gave that decision and there may have been contact, but there didn't seem much interference from Charnley - certainly nothing worse that what invariably happens when 2 are chasing for the ball. And Charnley was running forward whereas the Saints winger was running backwards and may have been deemed to have been blocking/obstructing Charnley by other officials. Again, I may be wrong as I only saw it once on TV.

Whenever a high kick went up, the decision always seemed to be a Wigan knock on ( Bowen was harshly penalised on the Wigan line in the second half from what I could see) or a penalty to Saints. Crucial 50/50 decisions as stated above. The only "wrong decision" in Wigan's favour was a forward pass to Burgess in the second half which was not given.

Bentham has seemed to favour opposing teams on these 50/50 calls in the last few weeks from what I have seen on Wigan TV/Sky - Wigan beat Warrington despite him ( the knock on for the first Wire try when he could have gone to the video ref - it was in the same play the ball incident from which the try was scored) but his sheer refusal to go the video ref when there was a significant doubt beggared belief. And his failure to send Wood off but sin bin both him and Pettybourne! I remember contributing to a topic on here several years ago about Wigan's poor win statistics when Bentham was the referee ( it was approx. 30%) when with all the other referees it was between 60 and 90%. He seemed to improve after that, but certainly he has lapsed into his old bad habits recently.

Flower had to go - maybe LH should have been sent off as well. The nauseating comments from certain Wire fans on here when Westwood was equally guilty of thuggery against Green last year (but his was totally unprovoked unlike Flower's) also beggar belief.

Bentham refereed our 2011 Cup Final v Leeds and was dreadful. We won that in spite of him.
Trouble was that Silverwood ruled himself out with his terrbile game in the Saints v Catalans fixture. That left only Mr Clueless himself.

Widely regarded as the most controversial Challenge Cup final refereeing performance, in Wigan's favour of course, since 2003 and you claim "Wigan won in spite of him". The mass delusion on this thread and others by Wigan fans is something to behold.