Referees

I didn't thing Mr Ganson could have pulled off another blunder to match the one Him self and Kline came up with at Cardiff, but he has topped it this year with a master stroke,
What in heaven name gets into the man is beyond me, He has as much time as he desires to study the Video, he runs it backwards and forwards for as long as he likes and the best he can come up with is to insult our Intelligence by telling us he was watching the wrong man.
This is the new Referees coach we are talking about here, He has been controversial both on and off the field for much of his courier, exactly the right man for the job, I just wonder who at the RFL makes these appointments, in fact i wonder who appoints people to the RFL. I read somewhere just recently that N Wood was on a salary of £220,000 a year ( don't know if it's true ) If it is it seems like a lot to me to do a job that seems to mainly consist of the yearly rule changes, and a 3 yearly decision on who to let into the Super league,
I wouldn't think anyone from the RFL ever reads this board but just on the off chance they do, I would like to offer to do the job for 1/4 of that salary, I would be prepared to guarantee the game would be no worse off " or money back " and we would not be employing people of the standard of Mr Ganson.

I listened To Jon Sharps statement on the behalf of the RFL, I thought he spoke quite well , He didn't say anything that made much sense as to why Mr Ganson did what he did, but then Jon Sharpe never made much sense to me when he was the Giants coach either , It was a politicians response so has perhaps found his niche.

Having rewatched our cup match with Leeds on BBC i-player I can see why this happened. In our match he ruled very quickly on the Jamie Cording no-try stating ah yes there is the hand under the ball, just before the ball hit the ground. What he did then is look for what he thought was the decision and on the first suggestion of that ignored what followed.

The explanation of tracking the wrong player sounds exactly like that, in fact he could not have tracked the player at all or he would have seen the player he was tracking was the wrong man. What he must have done was looked at the wrong man in the freeze frame when Houghton kicked and made the decision then.

That also seems to explain a lot of non-application of Benefit of the Doubt (such as the Cording Try), I would wager that BoD does not actually apply in favour of the attacking team but rather when there is no evidence for what they are expecting to see.

The solution is to watch the entire clip each and every time rather than making a pre-concieved judgement and looking for evidence of that.

The previous decision in the Hull Derby on the Yeaman try was also dubious, I felt he was short, however I would concede that should probably have been given as BoD as it may just have touched the line.

In conclusion, I don't think there is any problem with the video ref systems, but I do think the VRs are not using the systems properly.

Giantdee wrote:

Having rewatched our cup match with Leeds on BBC i-player I can see why this happened. In our match he ruled very quickly on the Jamie Cording no-try stating ah yes there is the hand under the ball, just before the ball hit the ground. What he did then is look for what he thought was the decision and on the first suggestion of that ignored what followed.

The explanation of tracking the wrong player sounds exactly like that, in fact he could not have tracked the player at all or he would have seen the player he was tracking was the wrong man. What he must have done was looked at the wrong man in the freeze frame when Houghton kicked and made the decision then.

That also seems to explain a lot of non-application of Benefit of the Doubt (such as the Cording Try), I would wager that BoD does not actually apply in favour of the attacking team but rather when there is no evidence for what they are expecting to see.

The solution is to watch the entire clip each and every time rather than making a pre-concieved judgement and looking for evidence of that.

The previous decision in the Hull Derby on the Yeaman try was also dubious, I felt he was short, however I would concede that should probably have been given as BoD as it may just have touched the line.

In conclusion, I don't think there is any problem with the video ref systems, but I do think the VRs are not using the systems properly.

As far as i know when there is a try to be decided by the VR they run the tape backwards from the touchdown, doing that makes it as near impossible to track the wrong man as it can be.
As far as i am concerned I don't know why he gave that decision, He may have gone temporarily blind ,he may have accidentaly pressed the wrong button ,he may even have fallen asleep , What no one will ever convince me of is that he tracked the wrong player.

In the Giants game Bradford were denied a try because Langley encroached inside the 10metre from a offside position , The Video ref picked that up without any trouble, Although Barry Mc dermot was saying well he didn't have any part in the try, intimating that the try should have been given, In which case why have the rule if you are going to waive it.

All this sort of thing, shown and heard on TV just shows to joe public how amateurish the game is run.