Re: phil bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:20 pm  

The reaction of the players suggested it was good - they were on their way back for the KO before PB ruled it out...

Re: phil bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:24 pm  

haven't seen a re-run yet but it wasn't just the drop goal that got our backs up, he gave saints everything in the last quarter.
as i've said, no problem with the ferres red card, but how can a player stand up and shove the marker and get a penalty? how can a player lose the ball and get a penalty under the posts?
i might change my mind once i've watched it back but right now i feel that my team have 'been had'.

i should also add, congratulations to st helens and good luck for the next round.

Re: phil bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:26 pm  

When it happens to a big club, it gets 13 pages; when it happens to us, nobody gives a toss.

At risk of enraging Huddersfield fans, I repeat what has been said to me; "It evens itself out over a season - get over it."

More sensibly - it really is time that the officials were made significantly more accountable for their actions; the lack of such is creating arrogance, complacency and contempt for both players and fans of the game.

Re: phil bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:41 pm  

dboy wrote:

Wrong. Very, very wrong.

Can't stand Hudds and a Saints win is far better for the competition in my opinion.

I am in the group of people who wants refereeing standards raised and refs and their paymasters be held accountable for their actions.

Ignore the part about wanting a Hudds win then (a minor point anyway), but you are definitely in the group which wants to discount the camera angle from behind Brough because it suggests that the attempt was wide and thus contradicts your opinion (you labelled it the weakest of angles). You cannot pick and choose which angles to use and which to ignore because they don't support your opinion. You have to use all the evidence presented and draw conclusions based upon all of it. This incident was, no matter how much you wish to protest against it, a 50/50 decision with conflicting evidence sufficient to support either side of the argument but with no evidence to conclusively prove either that it was successful or that it missed. You only think that Bentham needs to be "held accountable" because you don't agree with his decision. Half the evidence suggests you were right, half the evidence suggests he was right. Nothing is there to prove it either way.

Re: Bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:47 pm  

Dally wrote:

Not only did it go back it was arguably kicked out by the defender.

It wouldn't have been a try though because for some reason Bentham hurriedly blew instead of letting the play pan out and then going to the VR.

Re: phil bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 9:49 pm  

The camera angle suggesting a miss is not in-line, it's offset and gives a skewed and unreliable view.

The better view clearly shows a good DG.

The refs have to up their game.

Re: phil bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:02 pm  

dboy wrote:

The camera angle suggesting a miss is not in-line, it's offset and gives a skewed and unreliable view.

The better view clearly shows a good DG.

The refs have to up their game.

Or players their accuracy?

Re: phil bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:19 pm  

Leaguefan wrote:

Or players their accuracy?

Yes. Players should never make mistakes, give penalties or commit foulplay, so the refs have nothing to call on.

A member for 13 years, 8k posts and i've yet to read one this isn't complete dog turd.

Re: phil bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:28 pm  

bren2k wrote:

When it happens to a big club, it gets 13 pages; when it happens to us, nobody gives a toss.

At risk of enraging Huddersfield fans, I repeat what has been said to me; "It evens itself out over a season - get over it."

More sensibly - it really is time that the officials were made significantly more accountable for their actions; the lack of such is creating arrogance, complacency and contempt for both players and fans of the game.

Whoops!!!

Re: phil bentham : Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:29 pm  

Leaguefan wrote:

Or players their accuracy?

aye, well he had four shots to get his eye in. Walsh needed one.

DG would be better employed looking at the shambles in claret and gold today as to why they lost