Brilliant idea.



A jet lack may be a simpler solution though!

Your mechanic example is laughable at best - a mechanic can generally sit and look at a problem for more than a split second then offer a diagnosis, largely the same with a doctor other than an emergency.



The try refereeing was more to highlight the difficulty and pressure of needing to make the right call at that second. Some here seem to think that shouldn't be a problem. I've already said that the majority of decisions the make are correct. I'm probably one of the biggest defenders of a ref in the stands, and tend to support decisions even if against my team.

I agree that was lucky and the TJ did actually pointed out Paul as "starting it" BUT, as I posted earlier, on the replays, if you look careful Ablit's left hand makes the first strike out at Paul. So even when the officals get it wrong, fate makes amends

glad I keep you amused mate but to justify the difficulty in reffing by advising to have a go is equally laughable - it's a thankless job but asking for consistency from game to game isn't too much to ask surely ?

I will back a ref to the hilt and have done often much to the wrath of the Catalan fans but honestly mate, some of the officiating at the GB this season has been criminal !

I can't believe this argument is still going! Ref got both decisions right (as all the replays showed) and the better team won. Simples...

the debate/discussion isn't over as if you go back to the original poster :

'fartown since 1961'



you will recall he/she remarked :

"Time Cummins was sacked and refereeing standards changed dramatically !!!"



so the debate is still alive and PopTart quite rightly saying that getting a couple of 50-50 calls wrong doesn't mean that "Rugby League no credibility left any more"



something has to be done though to make officials more uniform regarding consistency and working towards a more united interpretation of the rules - officials are too ambigous at the moment for whatever reason IMO

Dont feel too hard done by, that is the preserve of the smaller clubs.

Usually, the big 4 seem to get all the calls, which is probably just down to the perception of the fans of the lower clubs.

Is is really a case that the officials have been so poor in Perpignan or, is it the failiure of the ref to have a leaning towards a voiciferous and partisan crowd ?

I personally don't feel 'hard done by' - my team is Saints and we get our fair share of the calls , being one of the 'big 4' that is..



yeah, the officials have been poor this season at the GB with Halibut being the worst at Montpellier with Roby, Thaler & Child not far behind - true what you say though about the 'partisan crowd' and credit to the opposing players and the officials for being strong enough to overcome that vociferous and sometimes hostile crowd though it's no different to the good old days in the threepenny stand when away fans as well as officials were treated to similar verbal and occasional physical abuse when things didn't go for the home side ! haven't been to the KC so I don't know how it is nowadays but if some of the travelling FC fans are anything to go by then I don't really fancy a visit.

Regarding the OP - sporting history is awash with mistakes or contentious decisions - ball across the goal line? RU refereeing around the scrum - always open to interpretation, especially in world cup games.



As RL fans we worry too much about our credibility rather than concentrating on improving the game.



Regarding the main issues in this game;



1) Knock on from Kylie - the question is not whether he knocked it on, but whether he hit it unknowingly whilst making the tackle or did he attempt to grab the ball.

We see many games where a defender knocks the ball forward when making a tackle and it is ruled play on as they were not trying to get the ball. It didn't look like he knew where the ball was to me.





2) Briers - 99% of all games that would have been given as a knock on. Even where a ball more obviously goes backwards, the referee usually rules that the defender didn't control the ball and it is a knock on - It's pretty much a given other than when the ball continues to go straight behind the player. There was more than enough change in the direction of the ball for that to have been judged a knock on. It was also a very funny attempt by briers..........



3) Woods punch. Only a penalty? In a recent game Wigan v Wakefield. McIllorum was sent off for throwing a single punch on Elima - despite appearing to get elbowed in the head.



This is the most obvious area where referees should show consistency - a punch is a punch - everyone saw it, Woods was penalised for it, did he mean to do it - of course - it wasn't misjudged, mistimed, accidental. No debate at all - it's a sending off - regardless of the context of the game.



IMO - there should be room for a bit of biff - but something like this is so easy to apply the law consistently - why a completely different outcome for exactly the same offence?



Another ref and Warrington could have been playing most of the final with a man down - and then the main talking point would have been 100% about this - as it is, just because the ref decided to do something completely different in this case it is completely ignored. In other games punches are ignored - why the difference?

Doesn't matter what Leuluai's intent was, Delaney was offside so it still goes back to the original knock-on







Decision was technically correct, but often that would have been given as a knock-on







Contentious indeed. If only one player throws a punch or punches, there needs to be a sanction applied IMO, but refs will be accused of "spoiling a game" if they send a plyer off in those circumstances, even though that would definitely have been an option.

Fighting/punching should be simply 10 mins in the bin, 2nd offence same game red card.



Allows for a bit of biff but stops the game becoming a farce, everyone's a winner.

I understand why you would think that but technically Leeds were the attacking team. The definition of the attacking team in the laws of the game is the team which has territorial advantage regardless of who has possession of the ball. The incident happened in Warrington's half, so Leeds had the territorial advantage.