Fri 11 Jun: SL: Hull Kingston Rovers v Salford Red Devils KO 19:45 (TV)

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

11 hours ago, yipyee said:

Watched the game on sky and what a fantastic advert for the game the Hull KR fans and stadium game day production was. The place seemed to be bouncing and I am glad KR are finally getting a bit of success!

Whats interesting is they would have been relegated last year but after being protected from relegation had time to build for this year!

Exactly what I thought. It was so bright, professional and fun. Well done Sky and KR

[meast]

So a referee has apparently made a genuine mistake, a human error and yet he's getting the blame for an entire team losing?

So, how come we never see of individual players being given the same treatment about errors costing their team games?

I get that referees are neutral, but they're human as well and are prone to errors, admittedly, not as many as players or coaches make, but a team still has to do their job and defend their line from the opposition regardless of what a referee does.

I'm sick of reading RL fans grumbling about ref's, why can't people accept that they're a part of the game as much as players and coaches and can and will and do make mistakes. 

[meast]

12 hours ago, johnh1 said:

No we weren’t. I don’t think anybody is suggesting that Rovers didn’t deserve the win. But that one decision, in particular, ruined the game. Same happened apparently in the other game tonight. Once again, it’s the likes of Salford and Wakey who get the vast majority of these awful decisions. I’ve been watching this great game for 54 years, but close to giving it up now when it is clearly so fixed in favour of certain teams. 

Was it fixed the last 2 years to allow "little old Salford " to reach both major finals?

[meast]

11 hours ago, DG70 said:

Marshall was never the right fit to follow Watson at Salford, a poor choice, the club was crying out for a coach with some experience and pedigree, Marshall has neither. there are some good players in their squad but clearly they are very poorly coached and  have zero confidence at the moment, thats down to the poor management am afraid!

Really? I thought it was because of the ref's?

In all seriousness though, following Watson at Salford was always going to be a tough ask, in hindsight, maybe someone with a bit more top level experience and nous might have been a better fit, especially for the short term?

[Rupert Prince]

13 minutes ago, meast said:

Really? I thought it was because of the ref's?

In all seriousness though, following Watson at Salford was always going to be a tough ask, in hindsight, maybe someone with a bit more top level experience and nous might have been a better fit, especially for the short term?

On the other hand, is the squad good enough.  It was, and is being regularly repeated, a rotten decision that opened up 2 tries which broke the back of the game.  So it's tough to be too hard on Salford or its coach. 

[JohnM]

46 minutes ago, meast said:

So a referee has apparently made a genuine mistake, a human error and yet he's getting the blame for an entire team losing?

So, how come we never see of individual players being given the same treatment about errors costing their team games?

I get that referees are neutral, but they're human as well and are prone to errors, admittedly, not as many as players or coaches make, but a team still has to do their job and defend their line from the opposition regardless of what a referee does.

I'm sick of reading RL fans grumbling about ref's, why can't people accept that they're a part of the game as much as players and coaches and can and will and do make mistakes. 

Who is blaming him for an entire team losing? Name names.

[JohnM]

48 minutes ago, meast said:

So a referee has apparently made a genuine mistake, a human error and yet he's getting the blame for an entire team losing?

So, how come we never see of individual players being given the same treatment about errors costing their team games?

I get that referees are neutral, but they're human as well and are prone to errors, admittedly, not as many as players or coaches make, but a team still has to do their job and defend their line from the opposition regardless of what a referee does.

I'm sick of reading RL fans grumbling about ref's, why can't people accept that they're a part of the game as much as players and coaches and can and will and do make mistakes. 

Indeed. They can and do make mistakes and like teams and players they should be exposed to criticism when clearly justified, as in this case. Refs are trained, experienced, monitored but cannot escape criticism, though for some reason, unlike coaches, are denied the opportunity to explain. 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

35 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

On the other hand, is the squad good enough.  It was, and is being regularly repeated, a rotten decision that opened up 2 tries which broke the back of the game.  So it's tough to be too hard on Salford or its coach. 

They had the same good fortune with Quinlan’s sin-bin in the 2nd half, with the game still within reach and Rovers already 2 forwards out of the match, and failed to do anything with it.
 

Salford’s coach doesn’t seem to be able to organise an attacking structure that works, even against 12 men, so I’d say it’s all on him and his team to be honest... refs do what they do, cuts both ways 

[Harry Stottle]

15 hours ago, johnh1 said:

Of course we aren’t. How can we with this clown in charge?

Isn't he our top ref?

How he got chosen to the ref GB's tour of NZ I will never ever know or even be  convinced it was a good idea. 

I would never say he leans to one team or another I just think he makes far to many bad decisions for someone of his so called standing, it really does show to me that we are at a very low point with the quality of our officials.

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

I would argue that one try with a man down was given after a marginal and dubious 6 again.

There are too many marginal decisions which refs have to make.  But the strip given against Salrd was a very poor decision compounded by a poor 6 again.

Every new rule introduced by RFL etc make the game ever more worse.

 Wouldn't disagree with that, can only give any credence to the 40/20 of those new rules in the last few years.

[Josef K]

14 hours ago, johnh1 said:

No we weren’t. I don’t think anybody is suggesting that Rovers didn’t deserve the win. But that one decision, in particular, ruined the game. Same happened apparently in the other game tonight. Once again, it’s the likes of Salford and Wakey who get the vast majority of these awful decisions. I’ve been watching this great game for 54 years, but close to giving it up now when it is clearly so fixed in favour of certain teams. 

It makes me wonder how you managed to get too two finals, with Salford getting everything going against them.

When you play Wakey which club has the bragging rights for the “We Are The Victims Of The Vast Majority Of Awful Decisions Trophy ” ?. 

[paul hicks]

16 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

An appalling decision.  Disgraceful yellow card.  The game becomes more Mickey Mouse with every day.

the yellow card was right  while i think the original penalty was wrong.

the card was for arguing with the official's beyond after having got the explanation for the decision .  I feel the ref let him go on arguing to long in any case .

the sending off at the end I do have an issue with because if you freeze frame it you see that the tackle was actually in the process of been made before the ball left the players hand. to my mind it would have been impossible to pull out of the tackle.

[paul hicks]

15 hours ago, johnh1 said:

The problem is that the vast majority of these marginal decisions go in favour of certain clubs and against certain other clubs. 

well its quite obvious if they go in favour of one club they go against another one but i have not noticed a particular Patten unless of course i put my blinkers on and claim my own team never gets on the good end of most decisions

[paul hicks]

14 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I can promise you if it’s fixed in favour of certain teams, that’s your working hypothesis, then it certainly isn’t fixed in favour of Rovers! We hardly ever get the rub of the green, and the RFL cabal can’t stand us mate 

 

I think we can all agree that its fixed but the problem we have is that supporters of all clubs will say its fixed against them in particular

[GeordieSaint]

14 hours ago, yipyee said:

Watched the game on sky and what a fantastic advert for the game the Hull KR fans and stadium game day production was. The place seemed to be bouncing and I am glad KR are finally getting a bit of success!

Yep - agreed; the ground looked bouncing. Like the addition of the temporary seating behind the posts!

[Josef K]

14 hours ago, johnh1 said:

I did not say that HKR are one of the teams who are favoured. They aren’t. But I think you will agree that they were on the right side of some appalling decisions tonight.

Have you ever thought John that this season Salford are were they are because they’re w@@k. If you think everything is a conspiracy against “Certain Clubs” the best thing to do is not watch any RL. In fact don’t watch any sport whatsoever because everything will be going against the club/animal you want to win. It’s going to make you ill  

[Rupert Prince]

49 minutes ago, paul hicks said:

the yellow card was right  while i think the original penalty was wrong.

the card was for arguing with the official's beyond after having got the explanation for the decision .  I feel the ref let him go on arguing to long in any case .

the sending off at the end I do have an issue with because if you freeze frame it you see that the tackle was actually in the process of been made before the ball left the players hand. to my mind it would have been impossible to pull out of the tackle.

In all honesty I cannot blame him for arguing, I thought the touch judge came in at one point, so may be he swore, but I thought it was just to clarify the foul.

I thought there were many instances of clearly delaying the play the ball, for both sides, where 6 again was not given.  Yet some rucks then blink and you missed it where it was given.

Hopelessly arbitrary... total joke of a rule. 

[paul hicks]

11 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

In all honesty I cannot blame him for arguing, I thought the touch judge came in at one point, so may be he swore, but I thought it was just to clarify the foul.

I thought there were many instances of clearly delaying the play the ball, for both sides, where 6 again was not given.  Yet some rucks then blink and you missed it where it was given.

Hopelessly arbitrary... total joke of a rule. 

if you tolerate one player arguing for to long then you lose all control  . after his first outburst it looked like he was to thats enough so the ref had no option but to card him. the touch judge to me looked like he was confirming the chatter was coming from the same person as the ref had his back to him the second time. if it was me i would have red carded him or indeed any other player who carried it on after he was told to shut it. if not we end up like soccer .

as for the rest of the game yes just like every official he missed things as he seemed only to have two eyes and no action replays to look back on in slow motion which of course leads me back to the red card I think in slow motion is wrong but it happens. 

its the rules I suppose and they have to be observed even if like me you disagree with a lot of them such as the ball steal which changing it to one on one many years ago has caused nothing but trouble ever since.

refs have always been slagged off even the so called great efs of the past who did not appear on tv and it will never change

[meast]

4 hours ago, JohnM said:

Indeed. They can and do make mistakes and like teams and players they should be exposed to criticism when clearly justified, as in this case. Refs are trained, experienced, monitored but cannot escape criticism, though for some reason, unlike coaches, are denied the opportunity to explain. 

Criticism is fine, blame isn't.

[JohnM]

4 minutes ago, meast said:

Criticism is fine, blame isn't.

So... No blame attaches to player mistakes? 

[Rupert Prince]

4 hours ago, paul hicks said:

if you tolerate one player arguing for to long then you lose all control  . after his first outburst it looked like he was to thats enough so the ref had no option but to card him. the touch judge to me looked like he was confirming the chatter was coming from the same person as the ref had his back to him the second time. if it was me i would have red carded him or indeed any other player who carried it on after he was told to shut it. if not we end up like soccer .

as for the rest of the game yes just like every official he missed things as he seemed only to have two eyes and no action replays to look back on in slow motion which of course leads me back to the red card I think in slow motion is wrong but it happens. 

its the rules I suppose and they have to be observed even if like me you disagree with a lot of them such as the ball steal which changing it to one on one many years ago has caused nothing but trouble ever since.

refs have always been slagged off even the so called great efs of the past who did not appear on tv and it will never change

Yes, its a tough job for referees especially when the t.v. is in their face.

It's hard for the player,  when he did nothing wrong at all and in a key area, then gets sin binned  for being massively upset. 

[johnh1]

As far as I could see, he wasn’t sin binned for being massively upset, although he had every right to be.

[Old Frightful]

1 hour ago, johnh1 said:

As far as I could see, he wasn’t sin binned for being massively upset, although he had every right to be.

Pretty sure you're correct here.

I have this feeling that, once Kendall gave the penalty for ball stealing, having known it was a harsh call given the reaction of the Salford players, he then called in the touch judge for a chat. 

Once he did this, any actions from that moment on, ie the sin binning, would be credited to the touch judge, as far as the fans are concerned.

It's a great get out clause for the ref.

[johnh1]

11 minutes ago, Old Frightful said:

Pretty sure you're correct here.

I have this feeling that, once Kendall gave the penalty for ball stealing, having known it was a harsh call given the reaction of the Salford players, he then called in the touch judge for a chat. 

Once he did this, any actions from that moment on, ie the sin binning, would be credited to the touch judge, as far as the fans are concerned.

It's a great get out clause for the ref.

Thanks OF. Yes absolutely. But add to that, I saw at least 2 Rovers players, showing 10 fingers to the ref, presumably claiming a professional foul in a try scoring situation. I thought the refs disliked phantom card gestures from the players.