Was he on Leeds -6?



Worse decision seen in a GF, since Chris Joynt's voluntary tackle!!

Its was for a 50/50 call, and I actually think he got it right, but I wouldn't have been at all surprised if he had not allowed it.

The angles he views are not necessarily the same as the chuckle brothers. See the ridiculously moot point of checking Eastmond's foot in touch for reference.

Just read a post on another forum ststing the majority of video-ref decisions, come from a result of a kick, high ball, grubber etc, maybe its about time we banned any sort of kicking in the game.



Which I think is a fair point.Basically hand the ball over after 6 tackles and try to introduce some flair into the game.Instead of the predictable 5 drives and kick.



I've now come to the conclusion, that video-refs are seriously damaging the game to the point where the ref can take the easy option of refering it upstairs, instead of giving an instant decision.you've also got to qustion the worth of the touchjudges, they're job nowadays is pretty irrelevent.

But what you're doing there is focusing on the bad decisions instead of looking at them as a whole. How many tries have ben given that would have been disallowed without a video ref simply because the ref was in a poor position? Apart from the odd glaringly obvious mistake I think the video referees have overall been a positive influence on the game.

I've come to the conclusion you are detached from the rest of humanity.

Monkeyboy-jog on woodbine.



Rugbychick- The problem with these video-refs is, that it seems every week they are coming up with the wrong decision, last nights shocker being the latest, especially as it basically cost Saints the game. If Leeds would have been well clear at the time, then that would not have been referred upstairs.



Unfortunately, what was a very good, hard game of RL,will now be remembered for the wrong reason.

Can you tell me the amount of tries suspect tries that would have been disallowed pre-VR that were actually tries and were rightly given because the VR had access to the technology?



I'll bet there's more of those tries than there are of the type last night.



That's the problem, people only moan about something when something's done wrong. There's not people starting posts on here when a VR gets a tough decision right, only when they get one wrong.

Who cares? Saints got beat !!!!!!!!!!





BENTHAM IS A WIRE NANANANA

it was never a try end off still funny tho

Bentham is a Leyther.

It was a try. Sinfields right foot was well more forward, you can't see it on the wide angle because it's behind the saints legs, you can see his non kicking foot which was further back and he looks offisde, but he is behind the kicking foot. Clear try.

You can't see it on ANY angle. Have a look at the 20m line and then look where they are both standing. Smith is in front. Very poor decision.

Are you being serious here.. ????

You must have been sniffing glue, kicking is an important part of RL, ban passing by all means as we wouldn`t really miss that but to suggest banning kicking is laughable.

Looks like Live Wired has been Live Wired. By his thinking maybe we should also ban passing, it would cut out Forward Passes.

It would have gone to the VR irrespective of what score it was.

I never said ban kicking, I said a poster on another forum suggested it.

I said i could understand where he was coming from, with regards to making the sport a more flowing game.

It wasn't even Kevin Sinfield kicking the ball so I don't think you are best person to judge the offside.

Whoever kicked it then





Don't think a bitter stains fan i a good person to judge it



end of the day, you have WON F ALL!!!

It was McGuire's kick and he was a yard off side ..



How Bentham can get such a big call wrong is a disgrace he was clearly off side but thats my opinion the result isn't going to change..



Rant over ..

A yard??????....Slightly over exaggerated, me thinks...





Personally, in my own opinion, at normal speed he looked onside, on the first replay he looked offside, but gradually on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc, look, it began to look more and more a 50-50 call.



To be fair to Bentham he couldn't be 100% right which ever way he decided, it was that close a call....

The showed it again today with a line across them he was an inch offside. Dunno why were moaning Stains got beat

We're not moaning, we're just saying it was the wrong decision.

Bentham got it spot on imo. Right decsion as Smith's feet werelevel with McGuire's leading foot.



What he did get wrong was Eastmond's try. He knocked the ball on