During the game last Friday there was a very 50/50 decision given TRY in the second half. The video ref spent over 2 minutes trying to work out if the Hull try scorer was onside or not after about 6 or 7 looks the video ref said something along the lines of "if we cannot see evidence if the player is offside or not then its a try! finally at the last second a camera right back in the stands made should still coudnt make out if the Hull Player was onside or not! The game till 2001 used to have a high camera on all televised games and it would have only took 1 look if one would have been present. That decision made Hull go to Wembley instead of Wigan and What is the point in having video technology if in some games there is no proof if a player is onside or not. The game is a total shambles

On the last camera view (from inside the side stand) you could clearly see Talanoa was on side.

Also the reason the video ref said if they could not see if it was offside that they would give it,is because the on field decision from the ref was a try before the referal upstairs.

No video ref. Thaler awards try. Simple. Same with minichellos' try that was over ruled

Get over it and move on

This^^^^^^
If the ref gives the try on field then refers it upstairs, then there has to be an almighty reason to refuse it and visa versa. In the case of the Ellis try/no try Tahler didn't give the try on field so Hicks was heard to say "can't see from this angle so will have to go with on field decision" or words to that effect, basically saying he wasn't prepared to overule Tahler, even though Ellis legally bobbled the ball onto the line. If refs are referring a decision upstairs the video ref should be free to make that decision and not constrained by anything.

Double movement by ellis and wigan should have got a penalty according to Cummings in the rugby paper


Although I'm still struggling to see where ellis raised his ball carrying arm off the ground

We won the game. It doesn't matter.

Thought it was a discussion about video reffing, using the Ellis try/non try as an example as to how flawed the system is.

On the subject of Cummings - regularly defends the indefensible on Sky so no real credence to his view.

No real issue with Cummings backing up his man. It would be a poor show if the head of referees was openly bagging his staff