Fri 4th Oct: SL SF: Hull KR v Warrington Wolves KO 20:00 (Sky)

[WN83]

21 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think you're maybe expecting stuff from Williams that he just won't ever deliver. McGuire was a certain kind of player, and finishing tries off will always get you glory. That isn't what Williams deliver. 

But Williams has been superb week in week out for Wigan, Canberra and Wire, as well as in internationals. I just think you are probably unfairly expecting him to be a player he isn't.

As much as it may seen like criticism, it's more a case of me saying how highly I rate him and I think he should produce more match winning performances in huge games. I know he's not a support runner in the mould of McGuire (although McGuire changed his game towards the end and still had huge moments in big games) but he's a huge threat with ball in hand and he scores some sparkling trys in the weekly rounds and bosses games, yet that's very rarely, if ever been replicated in a big semi or final and he's had loads of chances in them now. It frustrated me at Wigan but I do think this is the best version of Williams I've seen and he's got time yet. 

 

 

[up the robins]

Another good game in this year's  play offs, could of gone either way some excellent defensive efforts from both teams.

Hope Wigan  and Leigh put on a spectacle in front of that huge crowd looking forward to watching it.

I'm over the moon at getting to old Trafford but so far Rugby league has been the real winner 3 very close hard fought matches in the playoffs.

[eal]

Super League playoffs have certainly trumped the NRL playoffs which have had few close matchups.

[Old Frightful]

Only £350.000...

Anyone know how to set up one of those "Go fund me" appeals?

[Gerrumonside ref]

4 hours ago, eal said:

Super League playoffs have certainly trumped the NRL playoffs which have had few close matchups.

They’ve felt like the big events they should be.

 

[The Hallucinating Goose]

Oh... so I didn't have a nightmare then, it actually happened...

 

 

In all seriousness, well done to our neighbours across the river, it is always great to see a new team get to the Grand Final, now I just can't wait to see them get slaughtered..!

[fieldofclothofgold]

30 minutes ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

Oh... so I didn't have a nightmare then, it actually happened...

 

 

In all seriousness, well done to our neighbours across the river, it is always great to see a new team get to the Grand Final, now I just can't wait to see them get slaughtered..!

Otherwise????? you will have a winter to suffer and next summer to dread .in Richie you trust 

[Auntie Linzi Morris]

The whole point of the video ref is to assist in getting the correct decision.

The current protocols don't do that.

We should return to how it used to be. If it isn't clear on the field and it requires video ref involvement then let them make the decision. With the different angles, slow-mo, etc., it's much more likely they will reach the correct/most probable outcome.

[Padge]

26 minutes ago, Auntie Linzi Morris said:

The whole point of the video ref is to assist in getting the correct decision.

The current protocols don't do that.

We should return to how it used to be. If it isn't clear on the field and it requires video ref involvement then let them make the decision. With the different angles, slow-mo, etc., it's much more likely they will reach the correct/most probable outcome.

People moaned about that system, and moaned a lot, saying the on-field ref is closest so he should make the decision when inconclusive. 

Here's a novel idea, why don't we accept the refs' decision.

Edited October 5 by Padge

[M j M]

3 minutes ago, Padge said:

People moaned about that system, and moaned a lot, saying the on-field ref is closest so he should make the decision when inconclusive. 

 

I honestly can't remember anyone moaning about the system. They moaned that refs got it wrong but moving to a ridiculous system where the on field ref guesses and the video ref has to stick with that guess is just awful.

[getdownmonkeyman]

5 minutes ago, M j M said:

I honestly can't remember anyone moaning about the system. They moaned that refs got it wrong but moving to a ridiculous system where the on field ref guesses and the video ref has to stick with that guess is just awful.

The referee has a guess at the situation, yet the video ref has to be 100% certain to overturn the guess. Unfair on both referees.

[redjonn]

23 minutes ago, getdownmonkeyman said:

The referee has a guess at the situation, yet the video ref has to be 100% certain to overturn the guess. Unfair on both referees.

not sure I follow the logic... surely if video ref is not certain then are we asking for the video ref to adjudge without the evidence, that is guess which in his opinion is the likely occurrence.   How is that different than the ref judging upon his closer naked eye view a difficult call    .    Sometimes the video tech/camera's don't give a clear sight and sometimes the ref being closer can make a better judgement... but would like to check in case video's shows something different than his naked eye judgement.

Edited October 5 by redjonn

[Harry Stottle]

Solution:

Just ban all cameras telecasts and commentators and get back to one ref and two touch judges, it worked for a very long time when we could read about it in the press and listen to those who witnessed it at the ground, we wouldn't have as many armchair experts either.

[dkw]

26 minutes ago, getdownmonkeyman said:

The referee has a guess at the situation, yet the video ref has to be 100% certain to overturn the guess. Unfair on both referees.

Without VR the ref would have still been guessing on that decision last night. I think we need to be careful on this, I hate that VR sometimes seems to spend too long looking for reason ls to disallow a try times. I don't mind the refs call, my opinion is that has to be the main driver ofva decision, VR should be given 30s to a minute to review for anything blatantly different to that refs decision. If it's not obvious then move in, go with the refs call.

[MrIzzard]

35 minutes ago, getdownmonkeyman said:

The referee has a guess at the situation, yet the video ref has to be 100% certain to overturn the guess. Unfair on both referees.

Correct ref guessing video reff assessing multiple angles but the best review option wasn't looked at real time replay they got it wrong and it changed the game 100% but as they say tomorrow's fish and chip rapping. 

[SUPERSTUD]

1 hour ago, Padge said:

People moaned about that system, and moaned a lot, saying the on-field ref is closest so he should make the decision when inconclusive. 

Here's a novel idea, why don't we accept the refs' decision.

Yep go back to just accepting the referee’s decision and do away with the VR altogether. 

[Padge]

3 minutes ago, SUPERSTUD said:

Yep go back to just accepting the referee’s decision and do away with the VR altogether. 

I'd give it one game and one decision before people were screaming for VR to be brought back.

Just accept what they say.

[SUPERSTUD]

No matter how much you attempt to dress it up quoting rules etc between them they messed up. Was there a legitimate try scored. No initially short of the line and then held up. Such a crucial call in what was always looking like a very tight game. I do not support either team. Something needs to change. I much prefer the bunker system in the NRL.

[StandOffHalf]

I had trouble sleeping last night. It was an absorbing, close contest, but that Try decision will bug for a long time. I feel for Liam Moore, because, in the heat of the moment, he has made what is overwhelmingly likely to have been the wrong call.

He was bent over looking for a grounding as the Warrington player clamped the ball, which shows that he hadn't seen a grounding up to that point. This wasn't an obscured grounding where the ball gets down and the ref needs to have it checked because of an obscured view. It was a held-up situation, where the defender went to clamp the ball to get under and wrap it up. You go No Try there and throw it upstairs for the VR to check for evidence of grounding.

 

Warrington need a better goal-kicker as well...

 

 

Edited October 5 by StandOffHalf

[bratman]

Like Sam Burgess said in the post match interview, Warrington should have defended that play better, a winger shouldn't be able to push over from 5 yards in the first place

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, dkw said:

Without VR the ref would have still been guessing on that decision last night. I think we need to be careful on this, I hate that VR sometimes seems to spend too long looking for reason ls to disallow a try times. I don't mind the refs call, my opinion is that has to be the main driver ofva decision, VR should be given 30s to a minute to review for anything blatantly different to that refs decision. If it's not obvious then move in, go with the refs call.

I do think we have an issue with awarding a try when we haven't seen a try scored, despite having a ref, touch judges and half a dozen camera angles.

Because if we take that note at face value, we are saying that if we lose sight of a ball then we must award a try (how can we rule something out when we can't see it?). But that hasn't actually happened in all cases.

If a ref hasn't seen it and numerous camera angles don't see it, and everyone watching it pretty much reckons it's no try, it feels a quirk in the system to say it must be a try.

 

[PoorhousePete]

15 hours ago, DavidM said:

That rule needs changing . That must have been a guess and it’s binding the VR

Interesting this... If that went up to the VR without a refs call, then surely it would have to be given anyway, because the VR had no conclusive evidence of it not being grounded either. I suspect that if the law did change they'd be instructed to give the try If they can't be certain it didn't touch the ground.  ???

[Wilderspoolmemories]

12 hours ago, Click said:

No. The benefit of the doubt has gone to the attacking team for years.

Which is wrong in my opinion.

If we are not 100% certain it's a try then it's no try. Simple! 

This video referee was put in place to reduce wrong decisions by the on field ref, but all it's really done is make the situation worse.

[MatthewWoody]

Great great game of rugby league.

Just finished watching it. 

Tough result for Warrington, maybe they lacked some creativity? 

I wanted to see Paul Vaughan and Wire go through, but as a neutral fan I am happy the same, as we have a "new" in the GF. In addition to this, Hull KR had a terrific season and maybe for their performances all season long they deserved it.

Huge defensive exploit from them, who maybe got lucky with (some) ref calls and moments. 

Wire must be devastated and commiseration to them. They improved a lot and will be there next year. 

It was a great advert for the game of rugby league. I hope it reached sports people everywhere, as you can't help falling in love with this sports with matches like this.

Edited October 5 by MatthewWoody

[johnh1]

12 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

And for those who don't know, if the TJ thinks it is a try he stands goal line of the corner flag, If TJ thinks it is no try he stands field side of the corner flag.

That is a very good point, Harry. Do you know what the TJ did?