Is Super League Rigged?

[Wandering Warrior]

There was certainly a hand in there, which to me is a blatant attempt to interfere.
If the same occurred next week would the same decision be made?
Furthermore, what happens at games with no video ref? Let's go to that for every game and have a level playing field and keep the try scoring simple. Technology has a lot to answer for.

[fozzieskem]

And the last few points made by various people,to me,make the case of binning the video ref give the responsibility back to the bloke on the field,and doing that while it wouldn't eradicate mistakes and errors it would stop us fans tearing ourselves apart.

Sometimes technology is not good for the game,the video ref for me has to go.

[Wintergreen]

I voted "yes". Rigged is probably the wrong word but we certainly don't get our "fair share" of calls, so on that basis it is rotten.

[w.thomas]

You'd have to be pretty mental to think it's rigged. I do think refs have been making a lot more terrible decisions recently though but it's not just in the wigan games. Dont see the point in having a video ref who blatantly ignores what hes seeing with his own eyes.

[EDINBURGH-WARRIOR]

Keep the video Ref but stop the nonsense of the on field ref indicating that its a try or no try and leave the video ref to decide. The reason he sends it up to the box is because he is not sure so he shouldn't influence the decision to the extent that the video ref doesn't want to over rule him.

regards , EW

[stevethegas]

If you really believe that the league is rigged, then we might as will give up now. It's just too negative a thought.

But while I absolutely don't believe it's rigged, it's got issues and problems.

We will debate for ever over Clubb's try that wasn't given, but I and the Wigan fans can't see what was wrong, and it seems neither could most of the Hull fans and their coach.

If the video ref is asked for a matter of fact then it's useful. Was a player offside at the kick, was a foot in touch, was the ball dropped in scoring, or whatever, then there's little to debate.

Was this obstruction relevant, was it indeed obstruction, was it a forward pass, then we move into the realms of judgement. Cricket long ago decided that LBW was a matter of judgement and instituted a policy of giving the batsman the benefit of any doubt. We need a similar decision that unless proven to be an issue, then the pass, obstruction etc. wasn't.

I believe you can see if the obstruction was relevant and if a pass was clearly forward. So let's allow common sense to apply and not hide bound rules.

Give each captain 2 appeals if they genuinely believe there's an issue, but otherwise leave it to the onfield referee and only ask the video ref to decide matters of fact.

[josie andrews]

Keep the video Ref but stop the nonsense of the on field ref indicating that its a try or no try and leave the video ref to decide. The reason he sends it up to the box is because he is not sure so he shouldn't influence the decision to the extent that the video ref doesn't want to over rule him.

regards , EW

I've said this from the very beginning!
Just cos the Aussies do it, doesn't mean it's right!!

Just look how their fans are now complaining about these decisions!
It's just an insane ruling

[pedro]

rigged no, poor and badly managed yes. The aussies wouldnt stand for the crap we put up with

[Wandering Warrior]

Just to clarify a video ref cannot rule a forward pass. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[medlocke]

I've had that feeling since Madge took over, it's like they're scared of Wigan becoming dominant again and thus taking away the glory from their golden boys Leeds, that's Hetherington and his Yorkshire mafia for you