Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

John Drake

02/08/13 - Wigan Warriors v Hull Kingston Rovers KO 8pm (Sky Sports)

Who will win?   11 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win?

    • Wigan Warriors
      6
    • Hull Kingston Rovers
      4
    • Draw
      1

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

181 posts in this topic

I pay a lot of money for 2 season tickets - if the knowledgable poster could point me in the direction of the give aways, I would be very grateful...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Refs seem to be much keener to give forward passes these last few weeks maybe its Ganson influence. Either way they are still getting plenty wrong its just now they are giving passes as forward when they aren't.

The issue is the subjectivity of timing, angle and distance which are difficult to judge in real time. In the past we've had uproar about questionable short flat balls being let go, now we are having the same complaints when ones like Dobson to Eden are pulled up. Officials can't win with one eyed fans with a vested interest in the outcome of the game.

The only one I had an excellent view to judge was the Eden one at the end of the first half and whilst I would have had no complaints if the whistle hadn't blown, I could understand why it was called. It was a 50/50 call in real time from a direct view in line and without the benefits of slow mo replay or multiple angles (which can often by deceptive in any case).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether Child evened it out is irrelevant,

If you are one eyed and have a persecution complex.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but they do influence the game both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what got into Stevo bulling up Goulding in commentary and then making him M.O.M Did he not see Pea Eden or any of the Rovers players tackling their hearts out to head Clarke's stats. Did Clarke ever play for Wigan or is he just paid to do their PR on Sky?

If ever a game deserved a man of the match award for a player on the losing side, this was it. Eden was outstanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a pass from Briscoe to Miller in front of the East stand at the KC last night that looked miles forward to me (and a few Widnes players too) but wasnt given.

I think anyone who might suggest referees are even handed regarding forward passes when in front of a large home crowd are kidding themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If ever a game deserved a man of the match award for a player on the losing side, this was it. Eden was outstanding.

You sure Rovers didn't sneak Billy Slater onto the pitch when no one was looking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is the subjectivity of timing, angle and distance which are difficult to judge in real time. In the past we've had uproar about questionable short flat balls being let go, now we are having the same complaints when ones like Dobson to Eden are pulled up. Officials can't win with one eyed fans with a vested interest in the outcome of the game.The only one I had an excellent view to judge was the Eden one at the end of the first half and whilst I would have had no complaints if the whistle hadn't blown, I could understand why it was called. It was a 50/50 call in real time from a direct view in line and without the benefits of slow mo replay or multiple angles (which can often by deceptive in any case).

I agree the majority of forward passes that fans rave about like the Eden one last night. I would have no complaints which ever way it went as it would be impossible to say for certain either way. I just think there's a noticeable change in the way refs are ruling on forward passes in the last month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go, the usual "we was robbed" cobblers.

 

Refs don't have it in for teams, neither do they favour teams.

 

Ian Smith summed it up to me in a conversation I had with him a few years back, "refs don't care about the result", they do care about their performance, just as players do. They go out and do their best.

 

On the Charnley one, I haven't watched the game on TV yet and only saw it on the ground, BUT, do people realise a try is given/disallowed on first contact and not on anything subsequent. If the tip of the ball hits green grass first then any contact with white thereafter is irrelevant.

 

I thought HullKR played really well by the way and if they carry on like that for the next few games they could be causing a few worries in the play-offs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HKR also troubled us in the Cup and beat Wire and - I'm guessing but it's a fair bet - Saints. With Patterson they'll be a handful. Their gamesmanship though seems to cause them more harm than their opponents so they might want to re think that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go, the usual "we was robbed" cobblers.

 

Refs don't have it in for teams, neither do they favour teams.

 

Ian Smith summed it up to me in a conversation I had with him a few years back, "refs don't care about the result", they do care about their performance, just as players do. They go out and do their best.

 

On the Charnley one, I haven't watched the game on TV yet and only saw it on the ground, BUT, do people realise a try is given/disallowed on first contact and not on anything subsequent. If the tip of the ball hits green grass first then any contact with white thereafter is irrelevant.

 

I thought HullKR played really well by the way and if they carry on like that for the next few games they could be causing a few worries in the play-offs.

Yes, but it was quite clear that he grounded it on the dead ball line. Most people who have posted on here, including your fellow Wigan fans, seem to agree on that. 

 

I don't think too many people are coming out with "we was robbed cobblers", especially considering that Charnley's disallowed try probably should have been given. They're just annoyed that it took two wrong decisions to reach the right outcome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought in general the officiating wasn't great. Charnley's try should not have been given as it was grounded on the try line and touch line simultaneously. Charnley's effort that was disallowed was definitely a try. It's disappointing that a video ref can get two decisions wrong. Referees will make plenty of mistakes but there has to be less tolerance when it comes to video referees.

 

The ruck area was very untidy. Rovers seemed keen to clamp the ball and they got their hand trapped in quite often. Silverwood was consistent though so no complaints there.

 

Neither side played particularly great. Wigan were off the boil with Tomkins missing and O'Loughlin out for the majority of the game too. I thought in general the attacking play from Rovers wasn't as good as it can be. The line speed of Rovers was fantastic and it really caused problems for the Wigan pack who were a little lethargic at times.

 

Hampshire continued to show some good touches in an unfamiliar position. It would be nice to see him in his proper position in the halves though as his game is far more suited to that role. Burgess was also solid on debut and was only denied a try by a very good tackle from Eden. There's a lot more to come from Burgess I'm sure.

 

Lauaki was impressive too and is obviously trying to make up for lost time and make the Wembley side.

 

It was a good idea to rest some players - the cup is the most important thing at this moment in time. Besides, when players have been rested the games have usually been a lot closer and far more enjoyable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but it was quite clear that he grounded it on the dead ball line. Most people who have posted on here, including your fellow Wigan fans, seem to agree on that. 

 

I don't think too many people are coming out with "we was robbed cobblers", especially considering that Charnley's disallowed try probably should have been given. They're just annoyed that it took two wrong decisions to reach the right outcome. 

you seem to have missed the point I made, the fact that I haven't seen the TV footage, and I was explaining the law. I have not said it should or should not have been a try. If you go back and re-read my post you will not find I that I actually comment on the outcome. You seem to me to be thinking I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you seem to have missed the point I made, the fact that I haven't seen the TV footage, and I was explaining the law. I have not said it should or should not have been a try. If you go back and re-read my post you will not find I that I actually comment on the outcome. You seem to me to be thinking I have.

So you were explaining a law we all understand, yet in this instance the first touch down was blatantly on the line. As first the last 2 sentences, they sound like something from one of those unbelievable gobbledygook contracts that no one ever understands, other than a lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you seem to have missed the point I made, the fact that I haven't seen the TV footage, and I was explaining the law. I have not said it should or should not have been a try. If you go back and re-read my post you will not find I that I actually comment on the outcome. You seem to me to be thinking I have.

You asked if people coming to the conclusion that it should have been disallowed knew the rule, I replied by stating that I believe they do, it's pretty straight forward after all. 

 

I also addressed the point that not too many people seem to be complaining that Hull KR were robbed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you were explaining a law we all understand, yet in this instance the first touch down was blatantly on the line. As first the last 2 sentences, they sound like something from one of those unbelievable gobbledygook contracts that no one ever understands, other than a lawyer.

 

 

You asked if people coming to the conclusion that it should have been disallowed knew the rule, I replied by stating that I believe they do, it's pretty straight forward after all. 

 

I also addressed the point that not too many people seem to be complaining that Hull KR were robbed.

 

I'm back tracking on nothing.  I haven't watched the TV version yet, something I made clear. I also never stated my position on the legality or not of the try. You cannot back track from a position you haven't stated. So many people on here fail to understand the most basic laws of the game (i.e. forward pass) I thought it worth pointing out the realities as opposed to the often ranted about misconceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you should shut up until you have watched it again on tv. You were at the ground and must have been in the minority that didn't see the Sky screen or heard the crowd reaction to the numerous replays or in fact seen Charnleys embarrassed reaction to the decision. I for one have never said we were robbed or that I care if the decisions were evened out...My point continues to be that video refs continue to make some atrocious decisions without being held to account.

When someone outside of the RL can explain Ganson's continued employment I will just get on with watching the game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When someone outside of the RL can explain Ganson's continued employment I will just get on with watching the game!

Ganson made a mistake, explained why it happened and apologised for it - it was a regrettable error but he is human and its time to move on. Mistakes happen - although Hull KR have had a rough time with some decisions this year, they have also been the beneficiaries of some dubious calls in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm back tracking on nothing.  I haven't watched the TV version yet, something I made clear. I also never stated my position on the legality or not of the try. You cannot back track from a position you haven't stated. So many people on here fail to understand the most basic laws of the game (i.e. forward pass) I thought it worth pointing out the realities as opposed to the often ranted about misconceptions.

Hmm, talk rubbish about something and talk condescendingly to people, get called out on it so talk more rubbish and even more condescendingly. Its a bold strategy, but it just might work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, talk rubbish about something and talk condescendingly to people, get called out on it so talk more rubbish and even more condescendingly. Its a bold strategy, but it just might work.

Padge generally writes a lot of sense. I would be surprised if he meant to be condescending but am not surprised you read it that way.

Incidentally, having re watched the TV footage, if seemed to me that the Sky narrative was a bit skewed on this. First, if you look at the lines, the ball travelled forwards, and the passer did not overtake the ball, so it was hardly an outrageous call. Second, Sky assumed HKR would have gonen to score. Given the evidence of the rest of the game, the number of players Wigan had, and our greater speed, I do not share that view at all. It was only one possible outcome. Third, Wigan had 2 tries chalked off both of which could have been awarded, one being shown to be a try and the other being arguable.

Not to say HKR can't feel badly done to on Charnley's second try, but hardly akin to FC's daylight robbery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you should shut up until you have watched it again on tv. You were at the ground and must have been in the minority that didn't see the Sky screen or heard the crowd reaction to the numerous replays or in fact seen Charnleys embarrassed reaction to the decision. I for one have never said we were robbed or that I care if the decisions were evened out...My point continues to be that video refs continue to make some atrocious decisions without being held to account.

When someone outside of the RL can explain Ganson's continued employment I will just get on with watching the game!

I most certainly will not be shutting up on your say so.

 

Being at the ground does not mean that you have a clear view of the replays, I certainly didn't and many others at the ground wouldn't have. 

 

When I have studied the try in close detail I will form an opinion, then and only then I will, if I so wish, voice it. Meanwhile I will post what I have to offer on the subject thus far, and most certainly will not be intimidated by you into shutting up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any quarrel with the result of the game,HKR still had chance to win it.

 

 My problem is with the quality of the Ref''s in super league, I completely agree with the guy from the yorkshire Post ,They are not good enough and the RFL seem to be quite ambivalent about it, Yet there are people who still keep claiming they do a good job, or It's not easy they are doing there best, ( i suspect most of these are amatuer ref's themselves ) Well fair enough but the Bankers can claim they are doing their best, The people in child welfare who are found to be completely out of touch can claim they were doing their best and the list can go on.

League is IMO arguably the worst administered and Refereed sport i can think of, and if the likes of decisions like the recent one by Ganson and the one by Childs and the many others we get all through every season, are to be just tolerated or ignored or indeed explained away by an insult to our intelligence, Then lord help Rugby league, with the calibre of people we have running the game both on and of the field, It's no wonder the game never grows.

 None of the clubs especially the Wigans and Leeds or Wolves, will put up with a player they think is not up to the job, why should the RFL be any different, If they can't find people of the right caliber, then do what the clubs do, go get them from somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Padge generally writes a lot of sense. I would be surprised if he meant to be condescending but am not surprised you read it that way.

Incidentally, having re watched the TV footage, if seemed to me that the Sky narrative was a bit skewed on this. First, if you look at the lines, the ball travelled forwards, and the passer did not overtake the ball, so it was hardly an outrageous call. Second, Sky assumed HKR would have gonen to score. Given the evidence of the rest of the game, the number of players Wigan had, and our greater speed, I do not share that view at all. It was only one possible outcome. Third, Wigan had 2 tries chalked off both of which could have been awarded, one being shown to be a try and the other being arguable.

Not to say HKR can't feel badly done to on Charnley's second try, but hardly akin to FC's daylight robbery.

It's the charnley 1st try we are talking about, which was quite obviously a wrong call by the vr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was it that obvious? Seemed some doubt to me. That was just one of 3 such decisions, 2 of which we t against Wigan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any quarrel with the result of the game,HKR still had chance to win it.

 

 My problem is with the quality of the Ref''s in super league, I completely agree with the guy from the yorkshire Post ,They are not good enough and the RFL seem to be quite ambivalent about it, Yet there are people who still keep claiming they do a good job, or It's not easy they are doing there best, ( i suspect most of these are amatuer ref's themselves ) Well fair enough but the Bankers can claim they are doing their best, The people in child welfare who are found to be completely out of touch can claim they were doing their best and the list can go on.

League is IMO arguably the worst administered and Refereed sport i can think of, and if the likes of decisions like the recent one by Ganson and the one by Childs and the many others we get all through every season, are to be just tolerated or ignored or indeed explained away by an insult to our intelligence, Then lord help Rugby league, with the calibre of people we have running the game both on and of the field, It's no wonder the game never grows.

 None of the clubs especially the Wigans and Leeds or Wolves, will put up with a player they think is not up to the job, why should the RFL be any different, If they can't find people of the right caliber, then do what the clubs do, go get them from somewhere else.

ffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Sky would let the video referee express his thoughts as he deliberates, as do the BBC and Premier we might have an insight as to why he came to that decision.

Then perhaps the commentators might concentrate on what happens rather than speculating and constantly carping on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017