Semi Squad

[DaveO]

Didn't we win a Grand Final & a World Club Challenge with Sam Powell playing 80 minutes??

So? That was then and this is now. Wasn't it obvious today when MM was subbed when Wayne's alarm went off Salford got back into the game?

It's not the first time this season that around the 20 minutes mark substitutions have let the opposition in.

So should Wane persist with two hookers or because we won finals with Powell drop Micky and play Powell for 80 minutes? Or should he play MM for 80?

If we want to.maximise our chances of beating Hill in the final I think we need to play MM for the full 80.

Wane won't do it though. He's not ruthless enough and too loyal to Powell. Wane will convince himself Powell should be on the bench in the final and Hull will be setting the clock waiting for MM to go off.

[shaunedwardsfanclub]

what happened to Farrell?

Failed late fitness test.

Watching it back on TV, I have to reluctantly agree that I don't have too much of a problem with Thaler denying Burgess the try; I think he did lose it short of the line. Did he get a knock earlier? Either way, the Joe Burgess of a couple of years ago would never have been caught. Neither would Liam Marshall, for that matter.

I do. The referee gave a try therefore the VR needs to be 100% certain that he didn't score to overrule it and there is no way on this earth that he could have been certain. After watching 47 replays he was still in doubt therefore the try should have stood.

[moto748]

Well, yeah, but we see plenty of complaints about video refs just rubber-stamping the on-field decision, and if the on-field ref isn't sure, why doesn't he just say so? Personally, that's how I'd like it. In this case, Thaler didn't think it was a try. Neither do I, as it happens. Did he bend the normal application of the laws a bit? Yes, probably.

Hey, it didn't cost us, I'm not sweating it too much!

[DaveO]

I do. The referee gave a try therefore the VR needs to be 100% certain that he didn't score to overrule it and there is no way on this earth that he could have been certain. After watching 47 replays he was still in doubt therefore the try should have stood.

Looking at BBC highlights with commentary for video ref on that try a few minutes ago the video ref convinces himself Budgie lost control of the ball short of the line.

So as he did that, if that was his opinion it ought to be "well OK then" from us except for me he went out of his way to do so.

The problem with the video ref has always been over analysing things. In particular how slow motion changes perspective in that it makes things that happen in a split second look like they were premeditated (I'm not referring to this try in that).

I think we'd be better off scrapping it completely and if we can afford a 2nd official looking at videos we should instead employ him as a 2nd official on the pitch as they have done in Oz.

Never happen though. Sky TV like the video ref.

[Nezza Faz]

I do. The referee gave a try therefore the VR needs to be 100% certain that he didn't score to overrule it and there is no way on this earth that he could have been certain. After watching 47 replays he was still in doubt therefore the try should have stood.

Looking at BBC highlights with commentary for video ref on that try a few minutes ago the video ref convinces himself Budgie lost control of the ball short of the line.

So as he did that, if that was his opinion it ought to be "well OK then" from us except for me he went out of his way to do so.


I'm just waiting for Sky to introduce advertising on the big screen, like they do in Oz.

The question then will be if this "marketing" begins to extend the time taken over a decision ?

The problem with the video ref has always been over analysing things. In particular how slow motion changes perspective in that it makes things that happen in a split second look like they were premeditated (I'm not referring to this try in that).

I think we'd be better off scrapping it completely and if we can afford a 2nd official looking at videos we should instead employ him as a 2nd official on the pitch as they have done in Oz.

Never happen though. Sky TV like the video ref.

[Nezza Faz]

I do. The referee gave a try therefore the VR needs to be 100% certain that he didn't score to overrule it and there is no way on this earth that he could have been certain. After watching 47 replays he was still in doubt therefore the try should have stood.

Looking at BBC highlights with commentary for video ref on that try a few minutes ago the video ref convinces himself Budgie lost control of the ball short of the line.

So as he did that, if that was his opinion it ought to be "well OK then" from us except for me he went out of h

The problem with the video ref has always been over analysing things. In particular how slow motion changes perspective in that it makes things that happen in a split second look like they were premeditated (I'm not referring to this try in that).

I think we'd be better off scrapping it completely and if we can afford a 2nd official looking at videos we should instead employ him as a 2nd official on the pitch as they have done in Oz.

Never happen though. Sky TV like the video ref.

I'm just waiting for Sky to introduce advertising on the big screen, like they do in Oz.

The question then will be if this "marketing" begins to extend the time taken over a decision ?

[Fujiman]

what happened to Farrell?

Failed late fitness test.

Watching it back on TV, I have to reluctantly agree that I don't have too much of a problem with Thaler denying Burgess the try; I think he did lose it short of the line. Did he get a knock earlier? Either way, the Joe Burgess of a couple of years ago would never have been caught. Neither would Liam Marshall, for that matter.

BBC highlights seem to confirm that he was grounded short of the line, was pushed over by the tackler and the ball touched the line when Budgie still had it under control (arm/forearm)before he lost contact with it. I suspect even if he had both hands on it, it would still have been disallowed - there did seem to be a determination to chalk off all tries by us.
Budgie did seem to damage a hand early on and I think that may caused him problems throughout the match.

Watching it back on tv what got my goat was that thaler continually kept saying i need proof that its not a try and repeatedly said thats inconclusive several times before seeing the last picture that he'd seen several times (and said that was inconclusive) and said thats it lost ball no try!Seemed to want to disallow it.

[shaunedwardsfanclub]

Failed late fitness test.

Watching it back on TV, I have to reluctantly agree that I don't have too much of a problem with Thaler denying Burgess the try; I think he did lose it short of the line. Did he get a knock earlier? Either way, the Joe Burgess of a couple of years ago would never have been caught. Neither would Liam Marshall, for that matter.

BBC highlights seem to confirm that he was grounded short of the line, was pushed over by the tackler and the ball touched the line when Budgie still had it under control (arm/forearm)before he lost contact with it. I suspect even if he had both hands on it, it would still have been disallowed - there did seem to be a determination to chalk off all tries by us.
Budgie did seem to damage a hand early on and I think that may caused him problems throughout the match.

Watching it back on tv what got my goat was that thaler continually kept saying i need proof that its not a try and repeatedly said thats inconclusive several times before seeing the last picture that he'd seen several times (and said that was inconclusive) and said thats it lost ball no try!Seemed to want to disallow it.

Exactly, his decision was against the rules of the game. What is the point of having rules if refs are going to ignore them? As I have said elsewhere, if a no try decision had been given by the referee then Thaler could not have awarded the try and that is fair enough. Hick's decision on Saturday was equally flabbergasting.

[moto748]

Seemed to want to disallow it.

Yes, I think he did.

But not because he 'hates Wigan', but because he didn't think it was a try. Not for the first time with Thaler, I believe he bent the rules a bit the interests of getting the *right* answer.

Remember that shambles with the French ref a while back, I think Thaler was the on-field ref and the French guy was the VR. Anyway, the French guy either didn't know the rules, or got completely confused. Thaler basically ignored him, and did what he believed was right, and if I remember rightly, he was censured by the RFL for it.

Kinda similar situation here, I'd suggest. If Child had sent it up 'no try', I'm sure Thaler would have rubber-stamped it straightaway, and frankly no-one here would be complaining.

[TrueBlueWarrior]

20 minutes in Powell comes on for Micky Mac salford get two tries in short order.

:eh: