You try bending the rules you get caned, if Sinfield is persistantly offside he should get persistantly penalised, which tonight for a change he did.

Thats probably the only poor call against Hull KR all game though. And to be fair, Morgan was more aggrieved at the Webster no try. Which was the right decision.



I'm struggling to see what else there was

Even the clueless ones on SKY pointed out that Leeds getting penalised for not having two feet on the line was pedantic to say the least. And that if it was implemented properly it would cause havoc in the game and ruin matches



It would be like a referee turning round and giving a penalty for feeding at the scrum.

No qualms there but when both sides are offending and only 1 gets caned it gets annoying.

H-T-H.

I'll watch the SKY version tomorrow and make my mind up, maybe Sinfield makes it look more obvious than most!!

H-T-H too.

TBH I wouldn't really say that any of the penalties given against us were incorrect.



The only question is whether HKR were offending as well. But as Sky, like everyone else, follows the play there's no way of knowing whether we were doing anything differently from them.

I know Stevo and Eddie don't like to talk about the other code but I'm surprised when they were debating Webster's no try that no-one suggested copying the way the referee refers decisions to the video referee in that sometimes he will ask if there is any reason why he should not give the try.

As for the second set of 6 leading up to Ablett's try, i seem to recall the kick was very early in the tackle count and that the try came only a few plays after the kick so you might have even sneaked that try in without the ref's call!

I was thinking that too but wiping the tackle count clean changes the mentality of both the attacking and defending sides.

You're spot on. Just watching it again and yep, Aizue moves his right leg towards the ball. Correct decision, another set of 6.

You didn't need to see it. The ref could clearly be heard on a number of occasions warning KR players about not making the ten, not having 2 feet behind the line when defending. When Leeds committed such offenses it was zero tolerance time. When HKR did them it was a chat on the run. I don't care what policy refs adopt but would like them to adopt the same for both sides.

What difference would that have made in this instance?



The correct decision would still have been, 'no try' due to Webster knocking on with his left hand.