Totally agree, being saying this for years, the game is far to fast for one ref now, it is light years different to the game i started to watch in the 70's.
It is all about speed and scoring tries nowadays, the game has changed to make it more attractive to TV, the powers that be want games to be 32-30 end to end entertainment and i am convinced the refs are told to make it that way by 'evening up' games to keep them competitive.
There is no way one man can see everything and police everything, he needs at least one more offical on the pitch and far more help and input from the touch judges.
The RL should take a look at American football to see how they do it, they do not miss anything.

I would be happy to pay an extra £1 per match to allow/ pay for each game to be televised to a big screen descision wether on sky or not and have two or more refs on the field to make sure this crap does not happen
no brainer for me

The nature of refereeing in our games is so inconsistent that it is quite easy to look back through the game and find a decision that goes against you, however making a reasoned case for this being the reason for defeat would be much harder.

Hull probably have had the best case for this all season with the incidents on Saturday, even then you can point to the awful defending at the end which gave Rovers the 4 points which ultimately cost them the game.

Rovers were unfairly helped into that position by the referee, but once that had happened Hull should have completed their set's and defended as a team, they didn't and they lost.

Only if the forward Dobson try was the one which won them the game in the last minute, would Hull be able to complain the referee actually cost them the game, as it was the wrong decision and they wouldn't have had the chance to reply.

Well said.

Even easier, take a sponsorship deal which pays money and use the money to make video refs available at each game and pay for 2nd on field referees.

Now stop being sensible, you know its the RFL and sense/logic is not something in the filing cabinets at Red Hall.

I would defy any team to defend the number of sets we had too in that second half due to the totally un-warrented penalty count.

While I agree with you, no side can go through 46 minutes (last penalty to FC was on 34 minutes) without conceding a single penalty, especially in a derby game and on a hot day. That is not the reason Jordan Turner shot out of the line and missed his tackle.

Why not? Teams have gone 80mins without giving a penalty away

What you're saying is you can't conceive the possibility of a team playing for just over half a game without cheating in some way?

In the Good Friday game back in 2009 at the KC, the only penalty Rovers got all game was in the 1st minute when Tickle put the kick off into the North Stand.

79 mins & 50 seconds without a penalty and we still won.

Oh, by the way, Ganson was ref that day too.

That's terrible. I bet you all called him some names didn't you.

I maybe should have phrased it differently, of course it's not impossible, it's just highly unlikely and certainly a massive turn around in discipline from the first 34 minutes.

Funnily enough no. We saved our name calling for 3 days later when Thaler came to town on Easter Monday and assisted Huddersfield to a huge win. Morgan copped a fine after that particular rant. Thaler is to Rovers as Ganson is to Hull.

Cheating has nothing to do with it, most penalties are lazy, careless or caused by fatigue.

Rover's were not square at the POTB a few times and and offside a few more, this wasn't them trying to cheat, just caught out by the opposition, needless to say none were given.

As I've said before I'm not blaming Ganson for the defeat, he certainly helped Rovers, but he didn't score their tries our miss our tackles, that's where the game was lost.