Yes I watched it as well and thought Child was his usual inconsistent self, missing and letting a few things go for each side but nothing one sided, it's funny when you haven't got a dog in the race that happens.

Too many high shots from both side went unpunished, amazed it did not blow up.

Not sure but I think the MC was Ben Thaler, if that's the case then it really will add to the conspiracy theory by Fully and the rest of the dwindling Cas fans

All we need now is for SL/RFL to look at the incident where Rangi attacked the HKR players head on the floor and ban him for Friday then they really would implode on the conspiracy theories

This was once instance where I actually felt that Cas were harshly treated! However both he and Huby were all arms and hands in the face on pretty much every tackle they were involved in.

There were a few instances where he had a go at people when they were not in a position to defend himself. One of the early Hull KR scorers was an example. I thought it was a cowardly performance by him at times.

And I can't understand why Clarkey couldn't get his head round the notion that a player playing the ball when he isn't tackled (Huby) is wholly different from a player off-loading when held is shouted or who carries on running. In the latter instances, the play can resume in its intended way, ie; a play the ball. What Huby did was relinquish the ball when he wasn't tackled. They can hardly give the ball back to him and tell him to keep running.

It was a bit bizarre - the more he said it, the less sense it actually made. He just kept comparing two completely different scenarios and expecting them to be treated the same.

He didn't mention it again after Carney put him straight. I can well imagine it was a frustrating penalty to have given against you, but it was the correct application of the rules - Clarkey was floundering.

I was also surprised by Mr Child's leniency in respect of high shots; Mason and Huby were particularly bad - I thought they were lucky to avoid a team warning and someone in the bin. Agree with Slugger and to a lesser extent Carney - Chase has the capacity to win these close games for them, but he instead chooses to channel his energy into sulking and hunting down cheap shots - the blatant forearm to the face of the HKR scorer should have been dealt with more harshly in my view. He really is a nasty piece of work who, in my view, lets his team down on a regular basis; given his marquee status and the reputed size of his wages, I'd be royally pee'd off if I were a Cas fan - he doesn't deserve their loyalty or support.

I totally agree with this post.

I'm amazed by the reaction of some of my Cas supporting mates to last night's game. Huaraki seemed to be a standout for me, as were Huby and Chase - albeit the latter two for their niggling tactics.

On the Sky team, I think that Eddie and Stevo are awful, and their extended time in the role has given them an inflated sense of importance. Eddie has zero knowledge of how the game is played, and Stevo would have made an excellent expert 35 years ago. Clarke can be interesting but it's become a case of job preservation for them all, they see Eddie and Stevo talking nonsense and retaining their positions, so it's become monkey see monkey do.

Well I'm an England fan and I will be royally pee'd off if he soils the England shirt this season.

I usually go to a game or two but will not be doing so if he is selected.

To the comment about the head high tackles being unpunished, in reality the Cas ones were because they also let them through for tries that they could have stopped with a better tackle. Mason in particular.

From the play the ball thing, I can see what Clarkey is saying. They are not the same but the principle is. We are allowing someone to make a mistake but penalising another that is just a mistake.

Why bother penalising someone for playing the ball. For me, just accept it was a tackle and move on.
In reality, it isn't really a knock on to put it on the floor and role it back with your foot. Can't see why he can't just play on. There is no advantage to the offending side.
It would take the doubt out of the play. If you don't think you ae tackled and run off, you can come back. If you do think you are tackled when you are not, why not let him give up a tackle and play on?

Agreed. Its classed as a voluntary tackle but its about time the rules were tweaked to distinguish between that and a real voluntary tackle.

I think the problem with playing the ball when you're not tackled is you put all opposition players within 10 m in an off-side position, thus gaining an advantage.

He has been in the England team for the last 2 years.

I too will never spend my hard earned money to watch England while ever a Kiwi wears an England shirt,utter joke.