Sat 13th July : SL : Leigh Leopards v Huddersfield Giants KO 15:00 Sky TV

[sweaty craiq]

39 minutes ago, JohnM said:

I managed to catch the BBC match commentary in the second half at the point where Hudds came close to leading. Then it all went wrong for them and Leigh seemed to shift up a couple of gears, whilst Hudds seemed to fall asleep. What changed? It's hard to fathom from this match thread, mired as it is in the swamp of refereeing criticism.

Short 10 and slow rucks ruined the game. Awful to watch and will not encourage non season ticket holders to part with another £30 on Friday v London. Was like a 70’s throwback with the underdog illegally bringing the favourite down to their level

[daz39]

8 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Hi daz, firstly I thought Huddersfield showed real commitment for Robbo and that shouts volumes for the respect they must have had for Watson, the effort they displayed for a number of last ditch tackles they performed yesterday would most probably have got a 'bhugger it can't be bothered in previous weeks'. As for the discipline that will right itself now they know that they can put in good  performances, yesterday was all about effort and with that comes mistakes and mistimed tackles, I would be very enlightened if I was you and your fellow Giants fans.

Secondly, as for the fan situation I am not even going to try to make any excuses, you are very correct the fanbase as not always been like that it has certainly changed over the last couple of seasons, the numbers are better than they have ever been in my 60 odd years of continual attendance that is a plus factor, but that brings with it a dark side, where were they before? I occupy the same spot in the North Stand I have stood in since the LSV opened it's doors in Dec 2008 and you are quite correct the fanbase was never as abusive as it is today, the language and attitude from a number of them is terrible, and as you say from different ages, it once was just a few you could count on both hands but a lot of the 'newbies' seemed to have followed their bad example and not those who set a good example.

I am just a fan of the team, I do not speak in any official type of capacity but on my behalf please accept my and the good fans apologies for what you expierienced yesterday, and I hope it did not spoil the day for you, your grandkids and your fellow Giants fans who attended.

Thanks for the good words about our team Harry and no need to apologise, it certainly didn't spoil my day, just not used to a tirade of abuse from families and fans in Leigh shirts, it's usually all very civil over there so a very definite and obvious shift in the reception we recieved, hell we were the losing team so god knows what winning away fans have to endure.

I guess, as you've alluded to, success and the upsurge in support and interest in the town will have obviously brought out those less desirable residents, who probably had no interest previously in supporting the teams Rugby League team  now see it as something they don't want to miss out on. 

It is also reflective of today's lawless, disrespectful society unfortunately, though not sure 100 Huddersfield fans would be that much of a threat to their domain or 'den' as it's now marketed as.

As for the team and your comment regarding last ditch tackles, well we never got chance to make them as teams had more or less walked through the lack of defensive efforts at times, we would have loved to have got near a last ditch tackle!.

I know Robbo quite well personally as i was part of his testimonial committee and he's a great bloke and absolutely loves this club and will do anything to make it better and will also expect people around him to do so too, there were good signs yesterday, hopefully they start putting better things in place for the rest of the season.

 

[daz39]

3 hours ago, JohnM said:

I managed to catch the BBC match commentary in the second half at the point where Hudds came close to leading. Then it all went wrong for them and Leigh seemed to shift up a couple of gears, whilst Hudds seemed to fall asleep. What changed? It's hard to fathom from this match thread, mired as it is in the swamp of refereeing criticism.

Andre Savelio's red card for me, it left a gap on our right side which Leigh exploited twice, though a couple of individual errors and brain farts didn't help.

[Leyther_Matt]

2 hours ago, daz39 said:

Thanks for the good words about our team Harry and no need to apologise, it certainly didn't spoil my day, just not used to a tirade of abuse from families and fans in Leigh shirts, it's usually all very civil over there so a very definite and obvious shift in the reception we recieved, hell we were the losing team so god knows what winning away fans have to endure.

I guess, as you've alluded to, success and the upsurge in support and interest in the town will have obviously brought out those less desirable residents, who probably had no interest previously in supporting the teams Rugby League team  now see it as something they don't want to miss out on. 

It is also reflective of today's lawless, disrespectful society unfortunately, though not sure 100 Huddersfield fans would be that much of a threat to their domain or 'den' as it's now marketed as.

As for the team and your comment regarding last ditch tackles, well we never got chance to make them as teams had more or less walked through the lack of defensive efforts at times, we would have loved to have got near a last ditch tackle!.

I know Robbo quite well personally as i was part of his testimonial committee and he's a great bloke and absolutely loves this club and will do anything to make it better and will also expect people around him to do so too, there were good signs yesterday, hopefully they start putting better things in place for the rest of the season.

 

I sit on the 30m line of the East Stand towards the South Stand so very close to the Giants fans and all good natured. I had a member of one of your players families sat with me so that made things interesting!

Shame you had to put up with numpties on the walk back. Oddly enough I had a couple of comments walking behind the East Stand back towards the North after the game when presumably they assumed I was an away fan given the direction I was walking from. This despite wearing a Centurions polo shirt, so that probably gives you a clue on their collective intelligence. 

[StandOffHalf]

9 hours ago, LeeF said:

No it’s not

The ref is the ultimate arbiter for calls on the field. If he sees a flag raised in error, he can tell the touchie to put it down.

[LeeF]

4 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

The ref is the ultimate arbiter for calls on the field. If he sees a flag raised in error, he can tell the touchie to put it down.

No he doesn’t. The TJ is in charge of touch and kicks at goal. It’s in the laws

[StandOffHalf]

7 hours ago, LeeF said:

No he doesn’t. The TJ is in charge of touch and kicks at goal. It’s in the laws

''Accept'' is mentioned.

Touch Judge under control of Referee 10. A Touch Judge is at all times under the control of the Referee and may be dismissed and replaced if, in the opinion of the Referee, they can no longer be considered to be neutral. In this case, any decision made by a Touch Judge leading to his dismissal may be disregarded. Any misconduct by a Touch Judge should be reported by the Referee to the appropriate authority.

Ball swerving back into Playing Field 13. A Touch Judge should not raise his flag immediately the ball in flight crosses the touch line if there is a possibility of it swerving or being blown back into the playing field because play is not stopped if the ball does drop back into the playing field.

The ref is the one running the game. When a touchie does something the laws explicitly says shouldn't be done, the game-controlling ref should look at his touchie and they should both realise what to do. Everyone makes errors. The fact that neither of them realised or rectified the error is much more concerning to me than the fact the error was made in the first place.

Edited July 15 by StandOffHalf

[LeeF]

1 hour ago, StandOffHalf said:

''Accept'' is mentioned.

Touch Judge under control of Referee 10. A Touch Judge is at all times under the control of the Referee and may be dismissed and replaced if, in the opinion of the Referee, they can no longer be considered to be neutral. In this case, any decision made by a Touch Judge leading to his dismissal may be disregarded. Any misconduct by a Touch Judge should be reported by the Referee to the appropriate authority.

Ball swerving back into Playing Field 13. A Touch Judge should not raise his flag immediately the ball in flight crosses the touch line if there is a possibility of it swerving or being blown back into the playing field because play is not stopped if the ball does drop back into the playing field.

The ref is the one running the game. When a touchie does something the laws explicitly says shouldn't be done, the game-controlling ref should look at his touchie and they should both realise what to do. Everyone makes errors. The fact that neither of them realised or rectified the error is much more concerning to me than the fact the error was made in the first place.

I know you love bashing match officials as per your history of posting but that part of the laws you quote doesn’t support your “conclusion”. Let’s “dismiss” match officials in the middle of a televised SL match. Talk about OTT reaction.  
 

And to help your selective quoting here is the bit you missed

Accept Touch Judge decision 10. The Referee shall accept the decision of an official Touch Judge relating to touch and touch in-goal play and to kicks at goal.

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, LeeF said:

Accept Touch Judge decision 10. The Referee shall accept the decision of an official Touch Judge relating to touch and touch in-goal play and to kicks at goal.

But the ref doesn't does he?

The ref checks if the Touch Judge is correct in his adjudication when a try is scored close to touch, if the TJ does not hold up his flag his decision is that the field of play has not been breached, if TJ holds up his flag then he adjudges the field of play has been breached.

And we all know from observing nearly weekly expierience that the TJ is not always correct, and the referee is correct to have it checked out then if need be over rule the TJ. 

But on the point in question, yes the TJ has seen the ball breach the line, but until it bounces outside the field of play which includes the touchline, or comes into contact with a player outside the field of play or a player airborne but he left the ground outside the field of play then the ball is not dead, the touch judge did not observe what happened to the ball in it's trajectory how it finished or if a player legally put the ball back into the field of play, and as for Mr Grant in this situation he had no other function to adjudicate on this had his full attention, the flight of the ball was his only concern and he observed what it did - you could see that from the broadcast - he saw a player knock the ball back into play legally, but still goes with the TJ, I would say in this situation that the referee Mr Grant - A full time official - was unaware of this basic rule, why else having seen the incident would he rule the way he did? There is no other logical explanation.

PS I have also seen in my time, TJ's wave a kick at goal away, but the ref has awarded it.

 

Edited July 15 by Harry Stottle

[LeeF]

53 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

But the ref doesn't does he?

The ref checks if the Touch Judge is correct in his adjudication when a try is scored close to touch, if the TJ does not hold up his flag his decision is that the field of play has not been breached, if TJ holds up his flag then he adjudges the field of play has been breached.

And we all know from observing nearly weekly expierience that the TJ is not always correct, and the referee is correct to have it checked out then if need be over rule the TJ. 

But on the point in question, yes the TJ has seen the ball breach the line, but until it bounces outside the field of play which includes the touchline, or comes into contact with a player outside the field of play or a player airborne but he left the ground outside the field of play then the ball is not dead, the touch judge did not observe what happened to the ball in it's trajectory how it finished or if a player legally put the ball back into the field of play, and as for Mr Grant in this situation he had no other function to adjudicate on this had his full attention, the flight of the ball was his only concern and he observed what it did - you could see that from the broadcast - he saw a player knock the ball back into play legally, but still goes with the TJ, I would say in this situation that the referee Mr Grant - A full time official - was unaware of this basic rule, why else having seen the incident would he rule the way he did? There is no other logical explanation.

PS I have also seen in my time, TJ's wave a kick at goal away, but the ref has awarded it.

 

Other than ranting again about the mistake made at the weekend what is your point? As you quote the TJ adjudicates in touch which the referee accepts. It’s very simple 

[StandOffHalf]

6 hours ago, LeeF said:

I know you love bashing match officials as per your history of posting but that part of the laws you quote doesn’t support your “conclusion”. Let’s “dismiss” match officials in the middle of a televised SL match. Talk about OTT reaction.  
 

And to help your selective quoting here is the bit you missed

Accept Touch Judge decision 10. The Referee shall accept the decision of an official Touch Judge relating to touch and touch in-goal play and to kicks at goal.

I wasn't suggesting dismissing the touchie for his understandable mistake, Lee. I quoted that section to illustrate that the ref is in control. Looking to his touchie, mentioning that the ball had come back in, and asking him to lower the flag would have been the sensible way to address the situation.

Unfortunately, the error was compounded by the fact that the ref didn't seem to be aware of the law.

[Snowys Backside]

I have seen refs overrule a kick at goal plenty of times. 
 

Rhys Martin nailed 2 last week in one game, but it looked like the ref was a Homer

Didnt London have a perfectly good conversion waved away this week too ? 

[Harry Stottle]

23 hours ago, LeeF said:

Other than ranting again about the mistake made at the weekend what is your point? As you quote the TJ adjudicates in touch which the referee accepts. It’s very simple 

I was joining in the conversation Lee, yes it is simple to accept a very noticeable mistake. Just pointing out rules you quote  are not as black and white as you seemingly think they are.

Edited July 16 by Harry Stottle

[daz39]

That kick to touch was a weird one as we saw the almost exact same thing on the other side with Aidan Mcgowan but yet that was play on, strange scenario and one which i think must just go down as an error or misunderstanding from the officials.

I thought at the time it was a weird one as i believed the ball to still be live when Moylan pushed it back onto the field but hey ho no harm done and no one died and it gave the Leigh fans the chance to chant naughty things at the ref so that would've pleased them.

[phiggins]

1 hour ago, daz39 said:

That kick to touch was a weird one as we saw the almost exact same thing on the other side with Aidan Mcgowan but yet that was play on, strange scenario and one which i think must just go down as an error or misunderstanding from the officials.

I thought at the time it was a weird one as i believed the ball to still be live when Moylan pushed it back onto the field but hey ho no harm done and no one died and it gave the Leigh fans the chance to chant naughty things at the ref so that would've pleased them.

Best case scenario is that it was a simple lapse of concentration, and the touch judge just put the flag up, without thinking. Worst case is that he didn't know the rule properly. You'd hope it was the former and can understand that, after all, how many unforced errors do players make in a game?  The latter would be a bit more of a fundamental flaw.

[LeeF]

23 hours ago, StandOffHalf said:

I wasn't suggesting dismissing the touchie for his understandable mistake, Lee. I quoted that section to illustrate that the ref is in control. Looking to his touchie, mentioning that the ball had come back in, and asking him to lower the flag would have been the sensible way to address the situation.

Unfortunately, the error was compounded by the fact that the ref didn't seem to be aware of the law.

Which he can’t do as per the laws previously quoted to you. The error wasn’t compounded despite what you claim. 

[LeeF]

16 hours ago, Snowys Backside said:

I have seen refs overrule a kick at goal plenty of times. 
 

Rhys Martin nailed 2 last week in one game, but it looked like the ref was a Homer

Didnt London have a perfectly good conversion waved away this week too ? 

If both TJs agree then the referee cannot overrule providing the TJs have been formally appointed. 

[LeeF]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

I was joining in the conversation Lee, yes it is simple to accept a very noticeable mistake. Just pointing out rules you quote  are not as black and white as you seemingly think they are.

The rules are black & white in this particular instance. The rest is just your rant and noise

[StandOffHalf]

14 hours ago, LeeF said:

Which he can’t do as per the laws previously quoted to you. The error wasn’t compounded despite what you claim. 

It doesn't say that the ref can't advise that the flag is in error, when it is clear. It does, however, state that the ref is in control of the touchies.

The ref said that the ball had crossed the plane of the side-line and was therefore in touch. He DID NOT say that the touchie had flagged it and that he therefore couldn't remedy it.

I am not even suggesting an all-controlling ref. I think it would have made sense for them as a team to consult and reach the correct and informed decision.

Edited July 17 by StandOffHalf

[Snowys Backside]

6 hours ago, LeeF said:

If both TJs agree then the referee cannot overrule providing the TJs have been formally appointed. 

That I feel is correct. 
 

Normally happens when one flag is down and one up.