7 Mar: Catalans Dragons v Salford Red Devils KO 4.30pm (CET) (TV)

[Dave T]

That is correct. They get sent back if the player hasnt heard a held call. He was on the floor with a player on top. No held call required.

Not sure what Cummings is talking about.

That is 100% a penalty.

[johnh1]

Blimey. What a game!

[terrywebbisgod]

Bentham and Hicks should both be refereeing a Pennine League match next week

What has the pennine league done to deserve that.

[chuffer]

So the penalty is coz he didn't hear a held call?

[OMEGA]

What has the pennine league done to deserve that.

Good point!

[my missus]

well done salford, a draw is about right.

[Old Frightful]

Yes, I suppose Escare must have known he was held with the weight of the defender on his legs.

Fair enough.

[Dave T]

So the penalty is coz he didn't hear a held call?

the penalty is because he was tackled, ie stopped, elbows on the floor and a man on top, and then he got up and run off. That has always been a penalty.

The ref sends a player back if it is unclear whether a tackle is complete and the player hasnt heard a held call. ie when a player is stood in a tackle and a ref calls held.

He was clearly tackled, it was extremely dumb play by Escare, why did he get up and try to play on with 50s left?

[stevereed100]

If I knew that rule...and even stuart cummings knows it...how come Bentham and his 2 assistants bring the game into disrepute? They were all miked up so 3 to blame.

God help us if after game 23 a point seperates Salford....

Lets see some disciplinary action.

[Ullman]

No, I think he gave the penalty for backchatting.

He originally said go back

You saw Bentham signal to Escare that it was because the ball carrying arm had touched the ground.

[GIANTSTRIDES]

What was the penalty for?

According to our resident expert the Ref doesn't know the rules. We have a real Gem in Bentham, another game decided by him

[Ullman]

If I knew that rule...and even stuart cummings knows it...how come Bentham and his 2 assistants bring the game into disrepute? They were all miked up so 3 to blame.

God help us if after game 23 a point seperates Salford....

Lets see some disciplinary action.

Dave T has already explained very well why Bentham was correct.

 

Draw was a fair result. Salford deserved something from that game.

[Saintslass]

Bonkers game that.  Great for attacking footy fans but must have given their coaches a headache with all that missing defence.

[scotchy]

That is correct. They get sent back if the player hasnt heard a held call. He was on the floor with a player on top. No held call required.

Not sure what Cummings is talking about.

That is 100% a penalty.

player isn't held when his arm hits the ground, he is held when the ref calls him held.

 

If Escare plays the ball and Bentham hasn't called held it is an illegal play the ball and would be a penalty to Salford

If Escare lays there and does nothing and Bentham hasn't called held its a voluntary tackle and penalty to Salford

If Escare runs the ball and Bentham has called held he should be sent back to play it.

 

If Escare hasn't heard the held call, and does not know what the ref has seen and called, what is he supposed to do?

[stevereed100]

Dave T has already explained very well why Bentham was correct.

 

Draw was a fair result. Salford deserved something from that game.

I share Escares view that he wasn't held in the tackle, brought down but free. Why else would he shoot off...

Dave T is not the Oracle after all.

[Dave T]

player isn't held when his arm hits the ground, he is held when the ref calls him held.

If Escare plays the ball and Bentham hasn't called held it is an illegal play the ball and would be a penalty to Salford

If Escare lays there and does nothing and Bentham hasn't called held its a voluntary tackle and penalty to Salford

If Escare runs the ball and Bentham has called held he should be sent back to play it.

If Escare hasn't heard the held call, and does not know what the ref has seen and called, what is he supposed to do?

not true. Double movements would be clear cut if thats the case as the try could only be disallowed if the ref has called held.

[GIANTSTRIDES]

Dave T has already explained very well why Bentham was correct.

 

Draw was a fair result. Salford deserved something from that game.

But Cummings said a new rule is in force to deal with this situation, So who is right Cummings or Bentham.

[GIANTSTRIDES]

not true. Double movements would be clear cut if thats the case as the try could only be disallowed if the ref has called held.

 

 You need to be in Cummings place, I for one would be happy with that.

[scotchy]

not true. Double movements would be clear cut if thats the case as the try could only be disallowed if the ref has called held.

A double movement rarely has anything to do with the ref calling held.

[Dave T]

not true. Double movements would be clear cut if thats the case as the try could only be disallowed if the ref has called held.

to add further to this, a lot of tackles are complete without the word held ever being shouted.

[Dave T]

A double movement rarely has anything to do with the ref calling held.

if a double movement decision goes to the vr, using your logic, they wouldnt look whether the elbow has touched the ground, they would listen if the ref has called held.

You are saying a tackle is only complete if a ref calls held. I say thats not true.

[scotchy]

to add further to this, a lot of tackles are complete without the word held ever being shouted.

held or the tackle number should be shouted at every tackle, that is what refs invariably do. Where players don't hear them and carry on they can make them go back and play the ball

if a double movement decision goes to the vr, using your logic, they wouldnt look whether the elbow has touched the ground, they would listen if the ref has called held.

You are saying a tackle is only complete if a ref calls held. I say thats not true.

 No, the same as any VR decision it is sent up to another referee because the on field referee either isn't sure the play was ever held, or whether it was before or after the grounding of the ball and he is given the option of having it checked by the VR. And as with every other decision when it occurs outside of the VR's remit, he makes the decision.

 

Turn it around and you see the flaw in your argument. IF you are held when the ball carrying arm hits the flaw and are held by the opposition, and this happens, but the ref DOESNT call held, what do you do? Referee the game yourself and play the ball? Because that's a penalty right there.

[Ullman]

player isn't held when his arm hits the ground, he is held when the ref calls him held.

The tackle is complete as soon as the ball carrying arm hits the ground.

[johnh1]

You saw Bentham signal to Escare that it was because the ball carrying arm had touched the ground.

Yes, he signalled that the arm had touched the ground. I also thought I heard the ref to tell Escare to go back and play the ball. Escare argued and I think the ref gave the penalty for back chatting. I might be wrong but I think I'm right.

[Dave T]

No, the same as any VR decision it is sent up to another referee because the on field referee either isn't sure the play was ever held, or whether it was before or after the grounding of the ball and he is given the option of having it checked by the VR. And as with every other decision when it occurs outside of the VR's remit, he makes the decision.

by your logic the only important factor in whether it was held is whether the ref has said the word. He would never need to check with the vr, unless he has instant memory loss. If it goes to the vr and the elbow touches the ground, it will be held, even if the ref hasnt shouted held.

So your original point was not true.