He has his own rule book and makes things up for every game. I've noticed that when the crowd shout for a dubious penalty, he gives it. If he gives a penalty against and the crowd shout in disbelief, he gives another against just in badness. What brain cells he has lost, he gains with weight. He must surely be unfit to provide a sufficient refereeing standard.

It's about time the RFL sorted these ref out .If a player had a bad game he get drop
But this lot of refs can have a sh-t game but still they get another game next week
Sam Moa was unlucky Ellis put in a great tackle the player went straight down Sam was coming across and
he when over the top of both players but he caught the Wakey player with his trailing foot .That how I saw it.
It was accidental .Sam was committed to the tackle

I am very, very worried that the RFL reffing hierarchy are trying to "make a Lauaki" out of Moa.

Lauaki was ruined for Hull (though I'm sure he'll do brilliantly at Wigan) by having his aggression and confidence undermined by referees determined to treat him by his "reputation" rather than his actions.

I'm scared Sam is the new whipping boy and I thought his confidence went after the laughable "on report". Cockend's ridiculous high shot was merely penalised and Briscoe also nearly had his head took off with no bat of the eyelid from Ganson.

I think Hull should be proactive in this and approach Red Hall with their concerns before the next game. They should ask why Moa's actions are pounced upon so readily while other much more intentional and dirty fouls are ignored. Aside from the fact that this is penalising Hull, this is a man's reputation and career at stake.

Thats what i thought happened from behind the posts, it did look like accidental contact.

We said the same about Moa, could be a tough ride for him..

I have been watching Lauaki's progress (I love that player!!

) and you are right he is going well

Honestly, Marfa, I could cry. It was so obvious that Lauaki couldn't produce his best for Hull - simply because it was Hull that he was playing for - because the powers that be weren't having it.

I knew it'd be different at Wigan. He'll be immense.

It's criminal if it's allowed to happen again with Sam.

The fact that a penalty wasn't awarded suggests to me that Ganson or either of the touchjudges didn't actually see what had happened.

Surely if Ganson had seen the incident and witnessed foul play then he would have awarded a penalty?

Same, fancy letting a bloke who wears flip flops in the snow go, doubt I will ever get that vision out of my head, I loved that man



Checked today he played well again

...and we now have to go find a big dirty b***d prop from somewhere!!

For me there was nothing in it and as Hutchie said it was just the quick take down by Ellis and Moa may have caught the Wakey player but marginal as he didnt seem to make much contact. The only reason he was put on report is the fact the Wakey player stayed down and as it was Sam who has just served a ban then his previous has come into play with Ganson.

I hope the club ask the RFL and Cummings as to why Ganson felt the need to put Moa on report and the touch judge to come on for that and Tony Martins tackle yet he let Wakefield off with 4 head shots before deciding to have a word and the TJ never came on once for the half dozen head shots Wakey put on in the game?

Don't think either of them saw anything wrong with it, and it was put on report more because of the Wakefield players whinging (led by Washbrook I think). Think people are being harsh on Ganson for this one, like you say, it's not like he penalised us or anything.

Led by the gob-e that is Mathers

It was him and Washy, little cry babies the pair of them.
See he also got away with 3 high shots, then claimed Moa had murdered Southern.