Bent refs

Discuss all things Wigan Warriors. Comments and opinions on all aspects of the club's performance are welcome.
doc
Posts: 1431
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:08 pm

Bent refs

Post by doc » Sun May 12, 2019 2:38 pm

How on earth could they say that Tommy knocked on then. Wasn't looking at the ball which was dislodged by the impact.

doc
Posts: 1431
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:08 pm

Re: Bent refs

Post by doc » Sun May 12, 2019 2:55 pm

How often does the video ref overrule the onfield ref? Twice so far and all against us, thogh second decision was correct. Powell's try looked more dodgy than the Sarginson one.

User avatar
Mike
Site Admin
Posts: 5337
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2018 6:54 pm
Contact:

Re: Bent refs

Post by Mike » Sun May 12, 2019 4:24 pm

The sarginson try that was given looked like a text-book example of double movement. Maybe it evened out?

Caboosegg
Posts: 1684
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:51 pm

Re: Bent refs

Post by Caboosegg » Sun May 12, 2019 4:27 pm

Mike wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 4:24 pm
The sarginson try that was given looked like a text-book example of double movement. Maybe it evened out?
I thought this. His first one should have been a try, the second one was a double movement unless they are saying the tackle wasnt complete due to the wire players just falling off.
RL's biggest issue is the constant negativity of its own fans.

support verb [ (ENCOURAGE)

"to agree with and give encouragement to someone or something because you want him, her, or it to succeed"

User avatar
EDINBURGH-WARRIOR
Posts: 660
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 1:23 pm

Re: Bent refs

Post by EDINBURGH-WARRIOR » Sun May 12, 2019 5:08 pm

Giving a knock on against Wee Tam in the first half was criminal . A superb tackle . Definatlley look like a case of evening things up as to me Sarge's second try was a clear cut double movement.

What a miss Wee Tam am will be his defence is outstanding .

Regards EW
2002 and EW is hooked

SJ
Posts: 1007
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:46 pm

Re: Bent refs

Post by SJ » Sun May 12, 2019 5:32 pm

Think it was for the disallowed try

User avatar
EagleEyePie
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 9:42 pm

Re: Bent refs

Post by EagleEyePie » Sun May 12, 2019 5:33 pm

The refs aren't bent. I'd argue this was a case of 'over-officiating'. The correct decision was obvious. Tommy wasn't trying to strip the ball, the ball came free because of his fantastic tackle and the fact that it touched his hands is incidental. He's clearly not playing for the ball. However, the they changed the interpretation of the knock on rule to prevent players from going into tackles with their arms wide to block a pass and get away with a knock on. To everyone it's clear to see how the scenarios differ except, it would seem, referees who end up removing common sense to scrutinise decisions to the Nth degree.

The decision to award Sarginson the try after a clear double movement was similarly baffling. Did Hicks realise his previous error and either deliberately or subconsciously even things up?

fozzieskem
Posts: 3068
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 10:54 am

Re: Bent refs

Post by fozzieskem » Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 pm

EagleEyePie wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 5:33 pm
The refs aren't bent. I'd argue this was a case of 'over-officiating'. The correct decision was obvious. Tommy wasn't trying to strip the ball, the ball came free because of his fantastic tackle and the fact that it touched his hands is incidental. He's clearly not playing for the ball. However, the they changed the interpretation of the knock on rule to prevent players from going into tackles with their arms wide to block a pass and get away with a knock on. To everyone it's clear to see how the scenarios differ except, it would seem, referees who end up removing common sense to scrutinise decisions to the Nth degree.

The decision to award Sarginson the try after a clear double movement was similarly baffling. Did Hicks realise his previous error and either deliberately or subconsciously even things up?
I’d agree with this,I grow weary of “ref is bent” argument, prove it don’t sit behind a keyboard ranting st the world it’s pathetic.

I do think they do over officiate and if they make an error instead of letting it go and live with they try to even it up but and as I’m typing this the non sarge try is on...is it a knock on..not for me but John kear says the word pedantic and he was right because Tommy does seem to glance at the ball..I certainly wouldn’t have given it that’s for sure but also can see (just about) why it was given

wildbeast
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:16 am

Re: Bent refs

Post by wildbeast » Sun May 12, 2019 6:15 pm

2 very very poor decisions by the video ref. Gave me the impression he was determined to go out of his way to rule no try after what was a excellent tackle by Tommy- and then gave a try almost immediately after a pretty obvious double movement on the 2nd!!!
However big raps for every Wigan player. A great performance and gives us hope for the future despite the disappointment.

ian.birchall
Posts: 3083
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2003 9:42 pm

Re: Bent refs

Post by ian.birchall » Sun May 12, 2019 6:17 pm

Caboosegg wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 4:27 pm
Mike wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 4:24 pm
The sarginson try that was given looked like a text-book example of double movement. Maybe it evened out?
I thought this. His first one should have been a try, the second one was a double movement unless they are saying the tackle wasnt complete due to the wire players just falling off.
Exactly, both wire players somersaulted over Sarginson who had a game to forget even with the try.
Regarder une fille en bikini, c'est comme avoir un revolver chargé sur sa table:
Il n'y a rien de mal a ça mais il est difficile de penser à autre chose.


Now Europe is just for holidays.

Post Reply