No the one were he got It it down. Or doesnt that fit In with all the [ibull[/i

I think we have had the three worst video-referee decisions since it's introduction this year:
Early in season Leeds Rhinos given 'try' (was it JJB?) - even he got up and shook his head!
Then the Liam Watts given 'try' at Castleford.
Now the Roby 'try'.
These are not cases where there is an argument both ways, or that depend on the interpretation of a rule. They are all simply and clearly wrong when looked at within the rules of the game.

Its amazing what biterness success causes. Emmitts "No Try" and Robys try evened themselves out. Both were unclear, to the letter of the law both should have been given benefit of the doubt.

lautiitis' try against crusaders the first one

watts scored fair and square

best quote ever .that phrase made full metal jacket for me

I posted this yersterday on our board

Im pretty sure the referees genuinely do not know the rules

As a crusaders player was tackling roby as soon as roby made contact with the ground the tackle was complete, when it left his hand backwards he lost it after the tackle was complete..[usimple decision[/u

Its amazing he decison was roby never lost possession with the ball which is a blatant lie, eddie seemed fascinated with it going backwards but the tackle was already complete

I don't understand some people in here. It "evened" out. You mean the emmit no try, where the ball was held up off the deck? unless the ball is two foot long, it was not a try.

The roby decision was either a knock on, or double movement. Take your pick

Still seething about it as it was the match breaker. However, as Stevo's wont to say 'read it in the papers', and before people start slagging off Stuart Cummings they might like to consider that his problem might be that he can't get the staff.

Not talking about the Emmitt no try, but I dont think you even know what the benefit of the doubt rule is. Unclear doesnt equal try... No way could benefit of the doubt be applied to the Roby try. Get over yourself and your 'success', that has nothing to do with a shocking decision.

Spot on, it looks like the defender may have got his arm under the ball but you cant be certain with what was shown that he did, therefoe it should have been try-benefit of the doubt.

The roby 'try' was a shocker though, as bad as the watts 'try' earlier this season.

It was a knock on and a bad decision, The Emmit 'no try' was correct,no way did he get that ball down so that was 1 bad call by the Video Ref..Silverwood and his 2 flag carrying spectators made many bad calls for both sides, He could spoil a great final next week, but Smith, Thaler, Alibert and co are no better

Watts scored, roby didn't. They are nothing alike

The ball was not played correctly (which the ref asked the video ref to check) and the watts knocked on.

It wasnt a try.

They were two separate incidents, one happened in the first half and one happened four minutes from time and Watts never knocked on

Im sure alot of people will disagree with you on that, and no doubt had it been the other way round you would be adamant it wasnt a try....

No they didn't. Watts didn't play the ball properly in the run up to his try. He put the ball down on the ground and just stepped over it - didn't make no attempt.

As for the grounding, it was contentious. Had he did what he did in the field of play it would have been a knock-on and I'm of the opinion it should be the same over the whitewash too.

Watts didn't play the ball for Murrells try in the first half but don't let the facts spoil your rant.

He placed downward pressure on the ball over the tryline before it hit the ground so it's a try

I wouldn't because it was a try, he lost it but it never hit the floor before he grounded it so it has to be a try

I found that









I backed Saints last night but no way was that a try.

"Hey lads I think i have a bite!!!!"

I knew that would work. I thought that a Leeds fan would take me up on my offer rather than a pie. I usually don't troll but it was 2am and I could believe what I was reading. 5 pages on an incorrect video ref desision, WTF, It happens every week!!!! The quality of the refereeing isn't great in this country but the video refereeing (an easier job) is even worse. We have had video referees for almost 14 years now and there is still not an outline as to what they have to check.

Video refereeing in its current format doesn't work. It needs to be re-evaluated or scrapped.

Cummings would very unhappy about having to get rid of the video ref. He would miss his la weekends in France.

you cant even troll good, pathetic attempt. You just sounded like a bitter Saints fan, who doesnt know the rules.

Blind bias at its best



Downward pressure? he didn't even touch the ball until it hit the ground ergo knock on, learn the rules.

As you say, don't let facts spoil your rant

It was a shocking decision and the video refs should have to take some responsibilty when they make calls as bad as this. Bill Harrigan was dropped in the NRL for his shocker the other week. www.youtube.com/watch?v=oezJJ3pu9VQ The RFL need to do more!!

It was a shocking decision and the video refs should have to take some responsibilty when they make calls as bad as this. Bill Harrigan was dropped in the NRL for his shocker the other week. www.youtube.com/watch?v=oezJJ3pu9VQ The RFL need to do more!!