Batley

[Sir Jekyll Stocking]

No, our coaching is perfect.

Don't believe everything Coolie tells you. 

[EQUALIZER]

youre a team of thugs that's why the penalty counts so high and then blame the ref, you should be honest and address your disipline

Go well with your bottle throwing stone throwing Batley fans then.

[Crown Flatter]

Ask the referee.

WR is right. On one occasion in the second half the referee was waving Batley players on his right to get back on side whilst looking to his left; needless to say the Batley players remained where they were - in front of him.

I believe we had this ref in London and he was okay that day. We Campbell at Fev and everybody agreed he was terrible, but last week against the Bulls there was no problem with him. I don't get it with these officials at times.

A couple of neutrals (Wakey supporters) suggested neither of our sin binnings merited yellow cards as no penalty was committed by a Dewsbury player.

It's very difficult for me, but I have to say that Batley played well and obviously did their homework in us.

It's true our indiscipline did let us down, but our tackling is even worse and one player has, I'm told, conceded 11 tries on his wing this season. Time for him to have a rest methinks.

[ginaldo]

WR is right. On one occasion in the second half the referee was waving Batley players on his right to get back on side whilst looking to his left; needless to say the Batley players remained where they were - in front of him.

I believe we had this ref in London and he was okay that day. We Campbell at Fev and everybody agreed he was terrible, but last week against the Bulls there was no problem with him. I don't get it with these officials at times.

A couple of neutrals (Wakey supporters) suggested neither of our sin binnings merited yellow cards as no penalty was committed by a Dewsbury player.

It's very difficult for me, but I have to say that Batley played well and obviously did their homework in us.

It's true our indiscipline did let us down, but our tackling is even worse and one player has, I'm told, conceded 11 tries on his wing this season. Time for him to have a rest methinks.

in this quote you say it didn't merit a yellow card as no penalty was committed then say your indiscipline let you down make your mind up

[Wellie]

Unfortunately I couldn't make the game last night due to a surgeon performing his tricks on me a couple of weeks ago but have read these blogs and just looked at the video. My first thoughts are congratulations to Batley they won and that is that, but regarding the referee, to call him a joke would be an insult to a good joke. I would however call him grossly inadequate and by a country mile not conducive to creating a good rugby match.  

We are all too quick in criticising players who are answerable to both there club AND to the league itself, yet referees seem to be a rule unto themselves and are both unquestionable and beyond reproach with regard to their actions. There is no excuse for a bad or rowdy crowd in the game of rugby, in football yes due to their mind set but not in rugby. Crowds however can be wound up and refereeing the likes of which was on show last night does exactly that and this is not a Dewsbury biased view it can wind any crowd up, which is why referees should be monitored and action taken by the refereeing body to ensure that poor refereeing is ironed out and improved the latter of which is evidently required. The first sin bin last night was as big a surprise to me as I watched the video as it appeared to be to young Farrell, he himself looking round to see who the ref was referring to before realising it was in fact him.

It's about time referees looked at themselves and started regulating their own actions.

Once again congratulations Batley see you next time.

[distantdog]

WR is right. On one occasion in the second half the referee was waving Batley players on his right to get back on side whilst looking to his left; needless to say the Batley players remained where they were - in front of him.

I believe we had this ref in London and he was okay that day. We Campbell at Fev and everybody agreed he was terrible, but last week against the Bulls there was no problem with him. I don't get it with these officials at times.

A couple of neutrals (Wakey supporters) suggested neither of our sin binnings merited yellow cards as no penalty was committed by a Dewsbury player.

It's very difficult for me, but I have to say that Batley played well and obviously did their homework in us.

It's true our indiscipline did let us down, but our tackling is even worse and one player has, I'm told, conceded 11 tries on his wing this season. Time for him to have a rest methinks.

 

Weren't there three sin binnings?

 

1. For the professional foul on Ainscough.

2. As a result of the team warning.

3. For the head high tackle on Rowe at the end?

[Sir Jekyll Stocking]

I think Wellie is questioning whether the ref sin binned the correct player for the professional foul on Ainscough.

At the time I thought the fullback was more culpable than Farrell, but haven't seen the video to check.

[Blind side johnny]

I think Wellie is questioning whether the ref sin binned the correct player for the professional foul on Ainscough.

At the time I thought the fullback was more culpable than Farrell, but haven't seen the video to check.

 

 

Watch it SJS, objectively please, and tell me if sinbins are routinely handed out for this and the supposed push by Grady. For whatever reason the ref seemed anxious to penalise us on both occasions.

 

(By the time his actions started to look questionable we had already lost the game due to our own failings - nothing to do with the ref. He was, however, poor.)

 

.

[distantdog]

Watch it SJS, objectively please, and tell me if sinbins are routinely handed out for this and the supposed push by Grady. For whatever reason the ref seemed anxious to penalise us on both occasions.

 

(By the time his actions started to look questionable we had already lost the game due to our own failings - nothing to do with the ref. He was, however, poor.)

 

.

 

l haven't seen the video yet, but Grady was sent to the sin bin for committing the next offence after a team warning. It does not matter whether the offence in isolation was worthy of a sin binning. 

[Sir Jekyll Stocking]

Watch it SJS, objectively please, and tell me if sinbins are routinely handed out for this and the supposed push by Grady. For whatever reason the ref seemed anxious to penalise us on both occasions.

 

(By the time his actions started to look questionable we had already lost the game due to our own failings - nothing to do with the ref. He was, however, poor.)

 

.

Where can I see the video, BSJ?

[il cattivo]

Where can I see the video, BSJ?

YouTube.

Type in dewsbury rams v batley bulldogs.

Its the 5th or 6th clip down.

Just highlights.

[ramsfandan]

l haven't seen the video yet, but Grady was sent to the sin bin for committing the next offence after a team warning. It does not matter whether the offence in isolation was worthy of a sin binning.

it wasn't even a penalty disgusting refereeing

[distantdog]

it wasn't even a penalty disgusting refereeing

 

It was, because the referee said so!

[DOGFATHER]

For whatever reason the ref seemed anxious to penalise us on both occasions.

(By the time his actions started to look questionable we had already lost the game due to our own failings - nothing to do with the ref. He was, however, poor.)

.

He blew us up for 3 forward passes, 2 looked like certain tries, yet you scored at least 2 tries off passes which looked just as bad yet he didn't bother with them. The big thumbs-up from me about the ref last night was, he kept both teams defensive lines almost 15m back from the ruck and the ptbs quick. This allowed for a good open game and I reckon this was a big contributory factor to the poor defences on show by both teams. It's very difficult to stop big lads running at full tilt.

[ramsfandan]

He blew us up for 3 forward passes, 2 looked like certain tries, yet you scored at least 2 tries off passes which looked just as bad yet he didn't bother with them. The big thumbs-up from me about the ref last night was, he kept both teams defensive lines almost 15m back from the ruck and the ptbs quick. This allowed for a good open game and I reckon this was a big contributory factor to the poor defences on show by both teams. It's very difficult to stop big lads running at full tilt.

he was terrible and 19-5 penalty count inyour favour 3 sin bins to 0 and u still not happy what more do you want?

[Batley Bob]

Where can I see the video, BSJ?

[Sir Jekyll Stocking]

Watch it SJS, objectively please, and tell me if sinbins are routinely handed out for this and the supposed push by Grady. For whatever reason the ref seemed anxious to penalise us on both occasions.

 

(By the time his actions started to look questionable we had already lost the game due to our own failings - nothing to do with the ref. He was, however, poor.)

 

.

OK, seen the highlights on Youtube (thanks, Il Cattivo).

Trying to be objective here...

Team A commits a foul (interference at play the ball) under "normal" circumstances. Team A gets penalised by a penalty. Fair enough? I think we can all agree on that.

Same offence committed after a breakaway and Team B have a chance of making significant yardage , or possibly scoring a try, as Team A don't have many defenders in place.

Does the same offence (interference at ptb) warrant a stiffer penalty?

[i think that's the crux of your whinge, BSJ.]

 

I'm afraid you'll have to trawl through the rule book ('cos I can't be bothered). Or ask Mr Hicks - I saw him in the South Stand last night.

But our sisters in sport (proponents of the eleven a side, spherical ball form of football) I believe have a rule that a 'professional foul' by the last line of defence against a chance on goal will result in a red card. Natural justice, I suppose. So I have no qualms about a player receiving ten minutes in the bin under those circumstances (but I still think it should have been Guzdek rather than Farrell).

 

The Grady sin bin looked harsh, but DD (and others) says it came after a team warning. At the time I was watching after the safety of my mother and son in the South Stand, but assume he's right. I can't really offer any more on this one.

 

As for the third sin binning...

Swinging arm connecting with neck, then pulling backwards Looked bad from where I was standing it and looked no better on the replay. Your man can consider himself lucky it wasn't a red card in my (hopefully objective) opinion.

 

Finally... your comment I highlighted in red... was this an objective or subjective observation, BSJ?

[RogerT]

Looking at the video it seems that it was the fullback that was laying on or interfering so that the attacker couldn't regain his feet to play the ball, Farrell was pulled out goodness knows why as he was second man in and got away fairly quickly.

 

I saw nothing wrong in Grady's slight jump for the ball, his eyes where on the ball and it appeared that he tipped the ball onto his side's player.

 

That last incident looked like a quick reaction but that doesn't excuse the action he took and indeed a yellow seems a mild punishment. Possibly he could have been cited for further action.

 

It pains me to have said all this as I am laid up poorly and relied on the video's for this.

 

From Roger a Batley fan, still 2 more games to go.

[Kipperbang]

It's simple. Batley started the stronger, we didn't win the collision nor control the ruck. We forced the play and then gifted Batley at least 2 early tries. We rallied and were actually the better side for spells but again errors let Batley off the hook. The referee was poor and his ineptitude meant that we were never in with a real chance of overtaking Batley. The amount of soft penalties awarded only led to our frustration which in turn probably contributed to a lapse in discipline. On reflection Batley deserved the win as they looked the more effective in attack, though neither camp will be happy with the defence. Tonks was immense, Kain, Brown, and Morton were not. Best player on the pitch was Keegan Hurst, followed by Rowe - they laid the platform. Ah well, there is always next time

[Blind side johnny]

OK, seen the highlights on Youtube (thanks, Il Cattivo).

Trying to be objective here...

Team A commits a foul (interference at play the ball) under "normal" circumstances. Team A gets penalised by a penalty. Fair enough? I think we can all agree on that.

Same offence committed after a breakaway and Team B have a chance of making significant yardage , or possibly scoring a try, as Team A don't have many defenders in place.

Does the same offence (interference at ptb) warrant a stiffer penalty?

[i think that's the crux of your whinge, BSJ.]

 

I'm afraid you'll have to trawl through the rule book ('cos I can't be bothered). Or ask Mr Hicks - I saw him in the South Stand last night.

But our sisters in sport (proponents of the eleven a side, spherical ball form of football) I believe have a rule that a 'professional foul' by the last line of defence against a chance on goal will result in a red card. Natural justice, I suppose. So I have no qualms about a player receiving ten minutes in the bin under those circumstances (but I still think it should have been Guzdek rather than Farrell).

 

The Grady sin bin looked harsh, but DD (and others) says it came after a team warning. At the time I was watching after the safety of my mother and son in the South Stand, but assume he's right. I can't really offer any more on this one.

 

As for the third sin binning...

Swinging arm connecting with neck, then pulling backwards Looked bad from where I was standing it and looked no better on the replay. Your man can consider himself lucky it wasn't a red card in my (hopefully objective) opinion.

 

Finally... your comment I highlighted in red... was this an objective or subjective observation, BSJ?

 

 

It's an opinion so obviously subjective SJS.

 

Neither you nor I would compare soccer and RL rules or behaviour I would hope. My point, which I don't intend to labour any further, is that I have seen similar offences as the fist many times at SL and Championship level which resulted in a penalty, yes, but very rarely in recent years in a yellow card. I still believe (subjectively) that he was too anxious.

 

This is not a whinge (I'm sad that you needed to use such an expression SJS) but an observation and, as I have said before, this did NOT affect the final outcome of the match.

[billybulldog]

Surely only one was wrong! Wasn't he expressing his view of things in his second?

thank u dd i was my friend, but you can't reason with bsj even when others say it should of been a red

[billybulldog]

He was talking about smoking, not fighting BB, if you read the post on your forum again.was the video in your clubhouse bar or whatever you call it batley fans or does the eyes see what they want to see there aswel bsj

The eye sees what it wants to see BB. The first sinbin was truly a joke (watch the video) - it was questionable whether it was even worthy of a penalty. The second was on the back of a team warning but the ref was clearly anxious to spot any minor infringement: when did bumping into someone in RL constitute a penalty? The third might have been justifiable if the team penalty was still in operation, which it wasn't, but a straight red? Come on, be sensible.

[Crown Flatter]

in this quote you say it didn't merit a yellow card as no penalty was committed then say your indiscipline let you down make your mind up

Looking at the video, I'll stick with my comments regarding the two sin binnings and also would suggest that Ainscough "milked" his penalty. My remarks about our indiscipline were about such throughout the game, not the sin binning incidents, as I'm sure you are aware.

[Crown Flatter]

Weren't there three sin binnings?

 

1. For the professional foul on Ainscough.

2. As a result of the team warning.

3. For the head high tackle on Rowe at the end?

I was only referring to the first two.

[Sir Jekyll Stocking]

It's an opinion so obviously subjective SJS.

 

Neither you nor I would compare soccer and RL rules or behaviour I would hope. My point, which I don't intend to labour any further, is that I have seen similar offences as the fist many times at SL and Championship level which resulted in a penalty, yes, but very rarely in recent years in a yellow card. I still believe (subjectively) that he was too anxious.

 

This is not a whinge (I'm sad that you needed to use such an expression SJS) but an observation and, as I have said before, this did NOT affect the final outcome of the match.

Apologies if an ill-judged word caused offence, BSJ.

Shall we close this subject by observing that supporters, players, referees and even the occasional contributor to these forums are only human and make mistakes from time to time?