The reason why Ashley Klein will never be a top referee

[cpwigan]

The Ablett VR decision was far clearer. If he could not see that then he could not see anything. A few players pressurised him and he went to the VR

Faultless Mmmm It does not exist. It does not even merit consideration in those aforementioned games.

[cpwigan]

Here is a thought for referee. Player X is stood offside at the POTB, PLayer Y runs straight at him. Player X does not attempt to tackle him BUT makes no effort to let Y through. The team with the ball has been denied an attacking opportunity. A penalty should always follow. Yet it never is.

If we take that precedent why can players not chase kicks from an offside position and simply block the path of the kick returner. They would be doing exactly the same thing BUT I can tell you now EVERY referee would award a penalty. You could do the same thing at scrums too.

Referee need to think of the implications of circumventing rules because they create problems for themselves

[cpwigan]

Rob, the penalty against Saints for obstruction in the second half was a mistake an amateur referee would not make

Faultless

[robjoenz]

cpwigan posted:
Rob, first 5 minutes KC throws a pass that smith nearly intercepts, it started one side of the 20 line and ends up on the other side. Surely forward Remember what I have said re KC. He throws forward passes regularly.

You really do need to quiz up on the rules Allan, I've explained this to you I don't know how many times.

The ball was received about 1 m forward of where Cunningham released it, he was moving forward though. Rules state the ball must not be propelled forwards, it doesn't matter what happens after it has been propelled flat.

The Grapple tackle. If you look at the first 10 minutes. Leon Pryce commits 2 blatant grapples and yet nothing is said. Did the referee by not setting his stall out correctly make a problem for himself later in the game.

There are some that I feel should be penalised that don't get penalised. I guess it's deciding when a tackle becomes dangerous and hence to penalise it. There were a couple of tackles tonight where they started off looking dangerous then the player adjusted himself to make it legal, I think in these instances the player should not be penalised (unless it's a smack in the face obviously).

Gidley was bleeding even with the bandage. Klein should have sent him to the bloo bin

If you want to rename it I'd be more inclined to call it the 'red bin.' :doz:

I agree, he should have left the field for treatment, he didn't look in the best state did he.

Didn't see the vertical tackle... must have been during my toilet break.

[cpwigan]

Mmm You cannot give a penalty because somebody simply drops the ball. I can jump up and down in front of him at marker as long as I do not place any part of my body upon him.

If referees are going to be so pedantic why do they then allow approximately 50 illegal play of the balls every match. We had a fortnight where you had to touch the ball with you foot now we are back to rolling it between your legs.

BTW Brent Webb has not lived up to expectations

[robjoenz]

cpwigan posted:
Rob, the penalty against Saints for obstruction in the second half was a mistake an amateur referee would not make

Faultless

Not a mistake, just a harsh interpretation. McGuire did touch Flannery but wouldn't really say it warranted an obstruction.

...and stop twisting my words... I said NEAR faultless.

[turf]

cpwigan posted:
Mmm You cannot give a penalty because somebody simply drops the ball.

He didn't give the penalty because he had dropped the ball, he gave the penalty because of illeagal interference in the play the ball area.

[cpwigan]

Rob referees should take much more notice of feet position. If a players feet are positioned incorrectly and/or he does not swivel his hip as he passes it will go forward. KC cannot swively around his hips/waist and most of his passes are from a virtual stationary position so he has the momentum of a tortoise not a f1 car

[robjoenz]

cpwigan posted:
Here is a thought for referee. Player X is stood offside at the POTB, PLayer Y runs straight at him. Player X does not attempt to tackle him BUT makes no effort to let Y through. The team with the ball has been denied an attacking opportunity. A penalty should always follow. Yet it never is.

In the example you give it would be a penalty. The offside player must make an attempt to retreat to the ten.

The incidents you are no doubt referring to are what the likes of Newton and Cunningham try to exploit. The retreating player has the right to be somewhere on the field. He is obliged to get onside and so long as he does that there's no offence. The dummy half doesn't have to run at him, if he chooses to then it's his choice.

[butt monkey]

robjoenz posted:

weststandguy posted:
In the end,Stains won the game with a penalty that should never have been awarded,Klowns error!!!

I'm with turf here... as soon as the incident occured I called penalty at the TV before Klein gave it.

Webb had no need to bring his leg forwards towards the player playing the ball. That's an illegal interference... had the Saints man played the ball correctly it would probably have been play-on but the Saints player was under undue pressure and lost the ball.

A load of twaddle! It is the player's responsibility to keep hold of possession. The ball was lost clearly by Smith, before placing it down to "roll between his legs". (Something both sides appear to do regularly throughout).

IMO, Webb was simply "backtracking" out of the aforementioned ruck. If he wanted to "touch" or "kick" the ball, he would have made a better attempt than simply lifting the foot upwards!!!