Niels
-
Posts
4,271 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Niels
-
-
7 minutes ago, Wolfey Rovers said:
Shocking refereeing yet again. No standards, no consistency. Rfl please get a grip of yourselves.
It's the second night in a row the referee has decided to be the star by giving dramatic decisions.
Kendall had a horrendous last ten minutes.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Huddersfield's complaints about the pitch might cause doubt in their players.
Wakefield should give a response after last week.
-
1 hour ago, gingerjon said:
The video ref has rather muddied it all a bit by not actually seeing anything to confirm he was onside (assuming we saw all that he saw) but there was no reason for him to check that anyway (on my understanding of how the system currently works) as he wasn't actually asked by the on field ref to check for the onside/offside.
Yes muddled is a great word to describe it.
If what you say is correct, and I think it is, then he must have had some doubt himself but unfortunately he didn't then clear it up.
-
Just now, LeeF said:
It’s not a judgement call. The TJ clearly states onside. Interestingly not one of the many doubters has shown any evidence to support their claim
There is no evidence to show he was onside either.
That's why we are discussing it. If there was anything conclusive there would be no connection.
If you find any then I will happily admit I am wrong.
-
Just now, LeeF said:
He actually said that the TJ had confirmed he was onside. There was no issue and no doubt
He didn't though Lee, he said "they are all onside" in a frame where the try scorer wasn't in picture.
Others have said this previously in the thread.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, RP London said:
but if he captained called that he would have lost, as again they have to prove that the referee us wrong.. so it wouldnt have made any difference.
The initial call by all was that it was ok, I have seen nothing to say otherwise and I dont understand how people can claim that he was offside when there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to say that he was. There are 3 people though in the officiating crew who said he was onside from what they saw and, correct me if i am wrong as havent gone back to look at it, I dont remember the Salford players claiming he was offside, as i say, happy to be told they did as i havent re watched it.
One of the three, the video ref completely forgot he was on the field and thought someone else scored the try. Therefore his judgement isn't reliable.
-
1 hour ago, Dave T said:
The line in bold is one of the weirdest things I've read here, with respect
Is this the reverse angle that has convinced you he was offside?
Yes but of course it continued until we saw the winger who in my opinion, and lots of others, couldn't possibly have been onside.
The fact he was so far ahead the video referee forgot about him is to me, very illuminating.
Until there is real evidence though, it is a judgement call. Which is why there are differences of opinion.
-
1 hour ago, LeeF said:
It’s far from improbable that the winger could be onside. It’s highly likely that he was onside due to the type of kick, the distance etc.
The person in the very best position to call it was the TJ who clearly states onside. Anything else is either pure speculation or stirring
I think the key issue is that the video referee identified the wrong player when saying everyone was onside.
That in itself causes doubt.
I can't understand how he forgot or misread the play, I think all of us knew the scorer wasn't in picture.
-
11 minutes ago, Dave T said:
Nope. If he wasn't in the shot, you can't say he was offside. You literally have no evidence. When he appeared, was he running by any chance?
And the touch judge didn't have a feeling - have you actually watched it Neils? They went to the VR purely for the foul play, and the VR went back to the kick as process dictates.
But tbh, read back what you are saying - the try scorer is not on screen when the ball is kicked - yet you claim he was clearly offside.
I don't think people are making anything up, it just seemed improbable that the winger could have been so fast as to make up that ground and be so far ahead of his centre and the defence. Sometimes Chris Kendall calls offside on the grounds the player couldn't possibly be so far ahead.
It's possible to admire George Williams and Warrington yet still think it was offside.
The first 15 minutes they were unplayable and had a great intensity. I never thought the game was over.
-
53 minutes ago, Dave T said:
Yep. The only reason for it being called offside is because some people want it to be offside.
As a neutral who had no bias he was clearly offside. You could see from the replay behind the goal, he appeared later in the shot miles in front of everyone else.
The touch judge obviously had a feeling there was an offside as he checked it but unfortunately he checked the wrong player!
When he said they were all onside, the try scorer hadn't entered the picture yet.
-
41 minutes ago, johnh1 said:
They say that referees decisions even themselves out over a season. I pity the teams playing Salford over the next few weeks then.
I think as Paul Rowley inferred, the referee tonight got excited by the intensity and cheering of the home crowd.
I think the RL need to assess his performance and that of the video referee.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Just Browny said:
Yes, That is what he said "Nobody is saying he was onside".
There was an angle shown from behind the goal after the game where he materialised well ahead of where could be expected had he been onside. He wasn't even sprinting, he was stood still when he took the ball.
I have heard Chris Kendall give offside before and say that "he would have had to be Usain Bolt to get so far ahead".
The real crime was the error by the video referee identifying the wrong player.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:
So he's checked that the centre was onside , but not the player who scored the try
That was an unbelievable error.
He didn't watch the replay the whole way through. The winger was so far offside he only came into the picture at the end. It really was shocking.
He also must have known the centre wasn't the player who scored as he was looking at the 8 point try.
It doesn't matter whether Salford crumbled or not. To award an 8 point try by identifying the wrong player offside is embarrassing.
-
Just now, GUBRATS said:
So he's checked that the centre was onside , but not the player who scored the try
I couldn't believe it, he checked the wrong player!
The winger was so far in front he wasn't even in the picture!
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:
But then they have zero incentive to play French players to create meaningful international games for England where any growth is. I think we just have to bite the bullet and treat them different because they are different.
Fev will be fine. They have some weeks off home fixtures and a strong chance of being in final 4 to get a challenge cup draw. If they need to cut their cloth that is no bad thing for the league
I think the point about the players is excellent.
Toulouse have the best French half backs in the world, but of course they play union. I like watching them because it is a learning experience as well as enjoyable.
If we could get the same talent into league, and a good French team, it would really help.
I agree with you about Featherstone too.
-
2 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:
You're splitting hairs, USAP were in a Heineken Cup Final for goodness sake. I went to a USAP game in Perpignan in 2005. Their crowd was 10 times that of UTC, the stadium itself miles better. They had a club shop in the centre of town, kit made my Nike, and more corporate sponsors than you could shake a stick at. It was night and day to compare Union with League in Perpignan back then. The idea that Catalans didn't have to fight against established competition like Toulouse do is a nonsense, your own anecdote proves it.
I hadn't made any point.
Yes I agree both are competing against clubs with more tradition and success in the same city, just like your own club
-
27 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:
When Catalans entered Super League, USAP were just as strong in French RU as Stade Toulousaine. It’s the same.
I’ll say it again, Toulouse Olympique are far, far stronger today than Catalans were when they joined. Indeed TOXIII were probably stronger than UTC were back then too, and many of us were surprised Perpignan got the nod ahead of them. Their market potential is also much more attractive than Perpignan, which is a relatively poor, small city.
The fact is we gave Les Cats a 3 year period in which to establish themselves, and didn’t take £750k per year off them to subsidise their opponents travel. 15 years later we have a successful club, by every metric. And yet you still choose to ignore the lessons from that example, because it doesn’t fit your pre-conceived worldview.
Plenty of people like you on this forum and others objected to Catalans back then too. And did so for many years. The “local sport for local people” gang were demonstrably wrong then, and are still wrong now.
Interestingly Toulouse and Perpignan met in the 2003 Heineken cup Final in Dublin.
Toulouse won, one of 5 successes, whereas it was Perpignan's only final.
-
36 minutes ago, NW10LDN said:
Toulouse were founded in 1937 and survived despite everything which has happened to rugby league in France. Funny how you never doubt the attendances of English clubs. I detect a bit of bias here with a bit of chip on shoulder mixed in. Toulouse have said they want to focus on developing their own youth. It doesn't happen overnight and English clubs are in a much stronger position. People like you would see rugby league return to being amatuer sport in Europe.
In fairness he did say he really likes Catalans.
-
1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:
I think most proponents of that suggestion in France would support it being implemented for new teams in England, and only don't repeat that to appease the "p/r or we riot" brigade?
I think most rl fans are in favour or promotion and relegation.
-
8 minutes ago, Fevrover said:
Fans DO pick their games it's only the diehards who go come what may and its been said on here numerous times Fev have many income streams.
It's interesting about attendances.
When I first supported Batley they hardly ever won and that was part of the attraction. Supporting a side that needed my encouragement.
I always think of Featherstone as a small team so I like them to do well. As opposed to the big city teams.
I think for our sides we appreciate winning more as we know there are years of struggle also.
-
5
-
-
2 minutes ago, Padge said:
The try was given under the sticks, he would have scored in the corner.
I believe the choice is, penalty try no card for 'accidental' foul play when the ref considers a try would have been definitley scored, or a penalty try and sending off is an option for 'deliberate' foul play.
You can't be punished for the same crime twice but the sentence can be a lot harsher if premeditation is, in the judgement of the ref, involved.
If in the normal field of play the tackle warrented a yellow then a penalty try can be given instead. If in the field of play the tackle warrented a red then a penalty try and a red can be given.
Thank you Padge.
I tried looking online but your answer is more detailed and helpful.
I may ask you again in the future about the rules if it's ok?
-
7 minutes ago, Padge said:
You can't give a penalty try and a yellow card. The giving of one negates the other.
But wouldn't dangerous play, which includes head tackles, have to be considered separately from the award of the penalty try?
I have had a look online but I can't find anything clear.
In this game, St Helens weren't really punished. Castleford would have scored anyway. So there was no detriment for the head high tackle.
-
2 hours ago, Old Frightful said:
At the end of the day, it was a professional foul that prevented a try, so should have warranted a sin bin.
To compound that, it was a reckless head high tackle.
And he stays on the field?, remarkable.
My feeling at the time was that the referee gave the penalty try to avoid making a decision about whether a red card was applicable.
It was just his manner and how he explained it to the touch judge. Usually they would go to the screen to be sure.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:
Thats a huge win for Haven. How tight do you want the league. Big win for Batley too at home. A dozen teams all in the mix here. Big game tomorrow also.
Yes it was a vital win for Batley. It would have been a sickener to lose. Makes a real difference with a last gasp win.
I watched Bradford at York on tv so they must have improved very much to beat Toulouse. A very good win.
Fri 3rd Mar: SL: St Helens v Leeds Rhinos KO 20:00 (Sky)
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted
Exactly. Proper fans can see the inconsistency.