Maybe he thought the try was so good that it seemed a shame to disallow it outright, so he sent it up. In that respect he was doing Leeds a favour - so maybe he is bent

This comes closest to my feelings on it, though I'd add that the video ref has no excuse for deciding that there was an obstruction as there clearly was not. The on field ref making a call has turned what was a lottery into a fixed game - if he'd sent that up as a Try it would have stood - so we're actually further away from the correct decisions being made rather than closer as was intended.



That decision actually highlighted my biggest issue with the VR in the game these days, that defensive foulplay is often completely ignored. When checking for try/no try the first question that should always be asked is 'Were the defending team onside?' if they weren't or the markers were not square then that is always the first offence and in the event of a no try decision it should be a penalty to the attacking side, yet they never check. Let's live in a fantasy world where obstruction was the right call, the next play should have been penalty to Leeds as half the Wigan side were offside, instead we get no try and have to hand over the ball. that's not right.

I need to watch it again but I don't see how you can say there was "clearly" no obstruction. It was a shame because it was an unbelievable try, but the correct decision was made.

You really do need to watch it again. It's really very simple, nobody was obstructed. At all. Not a tiny bit. Tomkins made a bad read, asked the ref to bail him out and Silverwood obliged, end of story. If that's the correct decision then say goodbye to dummy runners, because now all you have to do is run in to them and you'll get a penalty.

It would have been interesting to see the VR decision if Silverwood had sent it up thinking it probably was a try.



You get the feeling the VR try their hardest to find a reason to match the on field refs decision.

That's a shame because I generally like Burrow, but nobody likes sour grapes. Maybe your classy coach is rubbing off on him?

This is what Wigan do very well by creating an obstruction in there favour, they did it quite a lot last season. They also milk situations when the ref has got his "eye off the ball", example was Micky Mc playing the ball into Wilkins face with his shins who was down on the floor with a blood head injury, think that was Silverwood, who only saw an "interference" play the ball and penalised the injured player.

We see a lot of instances where all players make false claims and the referee is forced into making a judgement which results in inconsistencies, smart play or a con play, depending which side you are on?

From a neutral perspective, McDermott has a lot more tact about him than the Great Ape of Lancashire.

Except he explained the 2014 interpretation, not the 2015 one.



Not much point having a supposed expert on the laws of the game sat in the commentary box if he doesn't even bother to keep his own understanding of them up to date.

Indeed he did:







Because everyone on here is familiar with the rules, right? Tomkins was…

Spot on.



The system is a mess.



Also, had McGuire been tackled short and Leeds scored on the next play that would have been fine even though silverwood thought there was an obstruction

It's a tight one, but you can't run behind your man that close to the defensive line and Watkins was already well in front of Singleton when he got the ball. It's close enough that I can understand why you'd be livid but it was the right decision.

Exactly. I reckon if he sent it upstairs as a try then the VR would've given it. That he took so long makes me think he didn't agree with the call as he could've said no try much sooner but probably didn't think is was and would've liked to have give it. The VR is now doing his job with one arm tied behind his back essentially as they seem forced to go with the on field decision unless 100% clear otherwise. Don't know what the numbers are but I've not seen many decisions reversed this year. Two Hudds tries vs Cas were sent up as tries that wouldn't have been awarded under the old system or if they'd been sent up as no tries....but they were sent up as tries and thus stuck with that decision.



Go back to the old system of just sending it up to the VR without an on-field decision, was much better IMO. You still got iffy calls last year because of the controversy around obstruction but at least they were making the decision they think is correct, not siding with the on field ref because they felt they had to.

If you can get away with it then why not? Every team does it.

Ahh, the Wigan motto.

For the umpteenth time for the hard of understanding, it doesn't matter where he runs if no defender is impeded.



Joel Tompkins was not impeded, despite his Oscar worthy performance to pretend he was. Therefore it's not obstruction.



Always helps if you understand the laws you're trying to apply.

I'd go back to the old system with one caveat, the ref should have to specify what he wants checking. One of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen was last year when Leeds scored a stunning last play try which the ref (poss silverwood) referred saying "is there any reason not to allow this", leading to the VR checking back through about 20 passes before deciding to disallow the try on a marginal call

It would have been awarded by the VR if no player was impeeded then surely? Oh what's that? You're a biased c**t who doesn't know what he's talking about? Thought so shhhhhhhh!



Also there's no P in Tomkins you absolute spazmoid!

Classy response that.



Guess the school holidays have started some places.

I'd also add that they need to check defensive team offences once no try is given as a team that was offside (like Wigan last night) shouldn't get a penalty after a no try (first offence and all that)

Haha! Every time Leeds lose McDermott uses his interview to criticise the ref, the opposition coach, the crowd, the RFL. Last night's comments to Rod Studd made him look like a kid who'd gone home to kick the cat after losing a game of marbles. He has zero class.



And just to show this isn't coming from an anti-Leeds perspective, I think the class and professionalism that Kevin Sinfield conducts himself with, whether winning or losing, whether being praised or asked the awkward questions, is without equal.

You clearly don't watch many Leeds defeats.



Are you getting McDermott confused with Wane

That's just a flat out lie. Whenever Leeds lose McDermott comes out and says the opposition were worthy winners, I can't remember a single time when he hasn't praised the opposition. He very rarely mentions the referee or the opposition coach, and I'm not sure why he'd mention the crowd??? One of the things I'm actually very proud of about the Rhinos is the class they show in losing, IMO it's unparalleled and it's coming from the top.



He might be unhappy at the press conference, and if given a specific incident I'm sure he'll criticise like any other coach would (last nights obstruction, Sneyd's 'tackle') but almost without exception he places the blame for defeat at the hands of himself and his squad.



Wane on the other hand rarely has anything but complaints even in victory. maybe you're confusing the two.

He blamed the Catalans crowd for a defeat claiming they influence the ref. Many of your players are very classy and deserve a lot of respect for the way they conduct themselves, but not all, and certainly not your coach.

I have them playing on a loop