Generally you seem a fair-minded poster Mick, but I can't agree with the above statement. That's the attitude, I'm afraid that gives bad referees carte blanche to continue making terrible errors and, yes, cheating. Referees are not gods and there should be some way that enables players, club officials and fans can take them to task when they display such terrible officiating and biased decisions. The man was awful!!

I think that until we obtain a temporary specialist winger we ought to try switching BJB over to the right outside Joe and bringing Max to play alongside Reece in order to give the threequarter line a better balance, and hopefully to bring Ben more into the game for his finishing expertise. Worth a try? (No pun intended)

I was referring to Leeming as cheating and that it wasn’t at full speed like you say, even looking at the ref as he throws it,I’m sure I read that it was up to the refs discretion wether to penalise or not the play we are discussing, if so, then he’s no better .

Yes he is in essence and we all saw it at the time, you’re just being contrary as ever.

Nope. You saw something and made an opinion. The ref saw the same thing differently. That's not cheating.
If he was cheating he'd have given them the game wouldn't he.

And he was closer.

I'll watch on Trinity TV. It may well be a mistake but the ref isn't cheating.

Sorry pops but you can’t win this one - it was simply impossible not to see what we did - end of.

The ref isn't cheating
The ref isn't biased
The ref just wasn't very good at the fundamentals, like offside and slowing the ruck, that hurt us far more than a few controversial decisions, which went against both sides btw.

Its funny how your impression of a game changes from watching it on the terraces to seeing it again on TV.
After being at the game I thought Shudds had been a bit unlucky not to have got something from it, but after watching it again on TV, I've no idea how they managed to lose by only one point.
And......its a hideous watch if you want to be entertained.

It's not a win or lose thing. You are trying to say the guy cheated. It would be a pointless thing to do to cheat that incident yet let Wakefield still win.
Sport history is full of fans who think the ref has a personal vendetta against them and their team.
In actual fact he just made a judgement. Given all the things going on around him maybe he made a mistake but to say he is cheating is potentially libelous but more so not what the evidence is shoeing you.

How about James C. Last season he was a very regular official in our games possibly 30%, until after the away game at Saints.
This was a game where he clearly cost us the points through what you would call "incompetence". Imo we complained and he was dropped down for a couple of games and then returned to SL. If it was just a poor display surely after the slap on the wrist he would return to normal duty.
We have not had him as main ref since, apart from the friendly with Hull in Jan, I don't know about VR or TJ duties.
Again Imo admittedely, that tv performance and previous stats combined has led others to draw certain conclusions about the matter.
I guess we are all entitled to draw our individual conclusions, incompetent or libellous thought deleted.

I think we need to take a chill pill on the cheating thing. I was chanting it with the thousands of others. Of course Mickalauskas wasn't cheating. But he was being a poor referee last night, last week on on a number of occasions I have seen over the past year or 2.
It's just the passion of the moment. It's what we pay our 20 odd quid for if we are honest. Imagine no controversy! How dull!

What I can't fathom is how the referee feels obliged to reward this grubby tactic with a penalty yet chooses to ignore failing to play the ball with the foot and constant offside. Now if he called all of these it would ruin the game, but he is making a judgement call. In the same way, he can give this penalty, wave play on, penalise the acting half for ungentlemanly conduct or give a scrum for losing possession at the PTB. It's all a matter of judgement and giving this particular decision shows very poor judgement and a lack of understanding of the game.

Just watched it back.
Clearly a penalty.
Crowther may not have intended it but he was on the wrong side of the ruck and didn't get out of the way.

Whetger you like it or not it's the rule and the Hooker had every right to pass the ball.
22.11 mins on Trinity TV if you want to look.

As I mentioned on the other thread. The attacker cannot deliberately throw the ball at a defender which he did whether wrong side or not. He must have been all of 1 1/2 foot high in the crouch position. Unless the receiver is 3 foot high the pass wasn't going to another player. He clearly throws it down towards the defender which is a penalty to us.

Having watched it back I'm astounded how much Dave gets held down but pinged for 4 pens himself. The offsides is debatable whether the linesman was telling him but they usually do.


The RFL statement read: “Following a review of the first two weeks of the Betfred Super League season, it has become clear that some players are deliberately passing a ball into a player with the sole intention of forcing the Match Official to award a penalty for offside.”

“Having reviewed these incidents, Rugby Football League Head of Match Officials, Steve Ganson, has written to all Head Coaches and made it clear that in these situations, Match Officials have now been instructed to consider Section 15 (i) of the Laws of the Game which state that a player is guilty of misconduct if he behaves in any way contrary to the true spirit of the game.

“This does not in any way absolve a defender of his responsibilities to clear the ruck and the defending team will still be penalised should the Match Official deem he is interfering with play.”