snowie wrote::lol: are you still mooooooing

TRB wrote:Don't agree re the double movement. It was a double movement - he didn't see it and called it as he did see it - that's part of the game.

My issue would be with the Quins no-try decision. Since when do we not give a try even when there is no definitive proof that he didn't score it. There was not onw shot that showed air between hand and ball, even though control may have been an issue, as such it should have been a 'benefit' call.

This is exactly what people have been complaining about in these situations - the video ref LOOKING FOR A REASON NOT TO GIVE A TRY! It is wrong, it was wrong last night and yes, it may well have cost Quin's the game, or a share in it!

Barry Clegg 2nd wrote:There was doubt over the double movement so it should have gone to the video, i dont like to see them go to the video all the time which is sometimes what happens but if there is doubt then it should be used, if you are not going to go to it when there is doubt then why bother at all.

Also there was a decision where Quins got one from the video where it was a knock on so i am told but i didnt see it as my little un was playing up at the time but from what i did see it looked ok, anyone confirm this one?

t-r-i-n-i-t-y wrote:No ref is perfect, but his English is better than yours!

zorro wrote:up yours