Wed 28 Jul: SL: Warrington Wolves v Wigan Warriors KO 19:45 (TV)

[LeeF]

1 minute ago, dkw said:

The ref said he blew before the ball landed as he didn't want a coming together of players when it did due to the nature of the "challenge" on the kicker.

As for the 2nd part of your post, don't be so ridiculous. 

In other words good game management by the referee just like when he binned the 2 players 

[yipyee]

26 minutes ago, dkw said:

The ref said he blew before the ball landed as he didn't want a coming together of players when it did due to the nature of the "challenge" on the kicker.

As for the 2nd part of your post, don't be so ridiculous. 

Watch it back, there were spells when the play the ball was a metre or 2 inside a line and the ref took wigan all the way back to the next line, its not hard to measure 10 metres when there are white lines every 10 metres

[dkw]

4 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Watch it back, there were spells when the play the ball was a metre or 2 inside a line and the ref took wigan all the way back to the next line, its not hard to measure 10 metres when there are white lines every 10 metres

Behave.

[Barry Badrinath]

44 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Watch it back, there were spells when the play the ball was a metre or 2 inside a line and the ref took wigan all the way back to the next line, its not hard to measure 10 metres when there are white lines every 10 metres

Sounds like you need to leave the white lines alone 

[LeeF]

1 hour ago, yipyee said:

Watch it back, there were spells when the play the ball was a metre or 2 inside a line and the ref took wigan all the way back to the next line, its not hard to measure 10 metres when there are white lines every 10 metres

Seriously lost it

[yipyee]

2 hours ago, LeeF said:

Seriously lost it

There was no advantage to either side, just poor refereeing

Maybe you are also too dumb to move 10 metres when lines are every 10 though??

On the reverse, he was giving shorter than 10 when Warrington was trying to get off their own line. 

Hes just a bad ref, did you see the york "try" he gave in the cup final?

[LeeF]

9 hours ago, yipyee said:

There was no advantage to either side, just poor refereeing

Maybe you are also too dumb to move 10 metres when lines are every 10 though??

On the reverse, he was giving shorter than 10 when Warrington was trying to get off their own line. 

Hes just a bad ref, did you see the york "try" he gave in the cup final?

Your definition of poor refereeing is a strange one and I’m far from too dumb. I can measure 10 metres with or without the lines

As for the bad ref comment. Really? His performance in matches has been consistently good for a number of years

[Jim Prendle]

1 minute ago, LeeF said:

Your definition of poor refereeing is a strange one and I’m far from too dumb. I can measure 10 metres with or without the lines

As for the bad ref comment. Really? His performance in matches has been consistently good for a number of years

I assume you are the founding father of The Referees Defence League (RDL)?

[dkw]

10 hours ago, yipyee said:

There was no advantage to either side, just poor refereeing

Maybe you are also too dumb to move 10 metres when lines are every 10 though??

On the reverse, he was giving shorter than 10 when Warrington was trying to get off their own line. 

Hes just a bad ref, did you see the york "try" he gave in the cup final?

You are embarrassing yourself now, just stop.

[Barry Badrinath]

6 minutes ago, dkw said:

You are embarrassing yourself now, just stop.

You note he's not complaining about the  'poor refereeing' when wigan weren't penalised for pulling akuala's scrum hat off twice. Which unless the rule has been changed is a pretty black and white decision 

[LeeF]

3 hours ago, Jim Prendle said:

I assume you are the founding father of The Referees Defence League (RDL)?

Nope. Just someone who was/ is countering some absolute garbage that have no resemblance to the truth

[Jim Prendle]

3 hours ago, LeeF said:

Nope. Just someone who was/ is countering some absolute garbage that have no resemblance to the truth

So you are saying that nobody has made one salient negative point about a referees decisions?

[LeeF]

6 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

So you are saying that nobody has made one salient negative point about a referees decisions?

Nope. I’ve just countered someone who was spouting absolute garbage that had no resemblance to the truth 

[Jim Prendle]

1 hour ago, LeeF said:

Nope. I’ve just countered someone who was spouting absolute garbage that had no resemblance to the truth 

Seeing as you seem to be the arbiter of garbage, can you please explain why the referee didn't go to the video during the incident with Marshall?

 

[yipyee]

14 hours ago, dkw said:

You are embarrassing yourself now, just stop.

Why because you disagree..

You should be working in the NRL with that arrogance

[yipyee]

8 hours ago, LeeF said:

Nope. I’ve just countered someone who was spouting absolute garbage that had no resemblance to the truth 

Or why the ref was taking play back further than 10 metres..

I am stating facts, you are stating your opinion which isnt supported by facts..

[LeeF]

7 hours ago, Jim Prendle said:

Seeing as you seem to be the arbiter of garbage, can you please explain why the referee didn't go to the video during the incident with Marshall?

 

Already stated why.
 

Probably time for you to give it a rest 

[LeeF]

42 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Or why the ref was taking play back further than 10 metres..

I am stating facts, you are stating your opinion which isnt supported by facts..

No you’re making stuff up as others have also pointed out

Probably best for you to give it a rest

[Jim Prendle]

4 hours ago, LeeF said:

Already stated why.
 

Probably time for you to give it a rest 

 

Please try not to be so patronising.

There is no valid reason for the referee, barring incompetence, not to ask the VR to have a look at that. 
 

Also, telling everyone to give it a rest does not make you correct by default.

[Jim Prendle]

On 29/07/2021 at 10:16, LeeF said:

Not in this instance.
I’m fairly certain, without being the referee at the time, that he would not have seen it as a game stopping incident unlike the Philbin one. This is based on Hicks’ position to the incident with 1 angle of view at full speed etc

The guidance is to okay on until the next stoppage unless a Doctor enters the field of play

The player was prone on the ground after the contact, you can see that and so can I. The referee was 10 yards away, and then considerably closer when he ran past Marshall in an attempt to get up with play. At this point Marshall was still lying on the ground. If the ref can't see that the player was out of it from 5 yards away, and let's be clear he wasn't exactly running past at light speed, then I guess the discussion is over.

Regardless of whether or not the contact was accidental, or that the try was valid, Hicks should still have had the wherewithal to realise that a player not 5 yards away from him was possibly in a lot of trouble. 

You can defend Hick's performance all you like, and you obviously will, but his reading of that situation was poor, and you know it.

[Barry Badrinath]

And yet, for years people have been saying "I don't know why refs ALWAYS go to the VR, why don't they back themselves and make a decision"

 

Hicks did.

 

He didn't think there was an issue, rhe nearside touchie didn't think there was an issue and didn't push for it to get checked,  its as simple as that

[LeeF]

3 hours ago, Jim Prendle said:

The player was prone on the ground after the contact, you can see that and so can I. The referee was 10 yards away, and then considerably closer when he ran past Marshall in an attempt to get up with play. At this point Marshall was still lying on the ground. If the ref can't see that the player was out of it from 5 yards away, and let's be clear he wasn't exactly running past at light speed, then I guess the discussion is over.

Regardless of whether or not the contact was accidental, or that the try was valid, Hicks should still have had the wherewithal to realise that a player not 5 yards away from him was possibly in a lot of trouble. 

You can defend Hick's performance all you like, and you obviously will, but his reading of that situation was poor, and you know it.

How do you know what I know? The rest of your post is just as inaccurate

[LeeF]

4 hours ago, Jim Prendle said:

 

Please try not to be so patronising.

There is no valid reason for the referee, barring incompetence, not to ask the VR to have a look at that. 
 

Also, telling everyone to give it a rest does not make you correct by default.

Every reason but you know that (or should if you have any bit of common sense)

Anyway only one poster being patronising and to help it’s not me

Finally I’ll let you have the last word as I won’t respond any further since you are either on a wind up or very misguided

[Jim Prendle]

9 hours ago, LeeF said:

How do you know what I know? The rest of your post is just as inaccurate

So you don’t have any answer as to why the referee just ignored the player lying prone on the ground as he ran past him?

You have been extremely vocal in your defence of this guy and yet you can’t come up with any reason why he did that?

My description of Hicks actions during that play is not inaccurate, in fact I have just watched it again and as I said, he was 10 yards away when he went down, and was still down holding his head when Hicks ran past him. Maybe you should watch it again or, as seems the case, you haven’t even watched it at all.

[ELBOWSEYE]

32 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

So you don’t have any answer as to why the referee just ignored the player lying prone on the ground as he ran past him?

You have been extremely vocal in your defence of this guy and yet you can’t come up with any reason why he did that?

My description of Hicks actions during that play is not inaccurate, in fact I have just watched it again and as I said, he was 10 yards away when he went down, and was still down holding his head when Hicks ran past him. Maybe you should watch it again or, as seems the case, you haven’t even watched it at all.

Jim no problem with your view on going to the video ref, but prone on the ground, I watched the highlights back today( you can see as well at the game) he looked out then it shows him looking back watching Mamo racing down the field and then deciding to lie prone again, was he out or hoping, don’t know but I agree over the ref.