: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:24 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

TBH I wouldn't really say that any of the penalties given against us were incorrect.

The only question is whether HKR were offending as well. But as Sky, like everyone else, follows the play there's no way of knowing whether we were doing anything differently from them.

He'd told Sinny he'd penalised us for not having both feet behind the line. Look at their defensive line around the 58 minute mark. There isn't a Rovers player with both feet behind the line. I don't doubt we were transgressing but he wasn't applying the rules to both sides, which is what you can quite clearly hear Sinfield tell him. Poor display from Bentham but it gave us a good workout for next week.

: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:28 am  

tad rhino wrote:

one HKR try came when the ball was knocked out of halls hand to another HKR player who was in front of his team mate. accidental offside at best.
mcguire was cynically tripped seconds before the HKR player was sinbinned for holding down.mcguire is heard complaining about the trip

Richie Mathers would be looking at 2 matches for that trip.

I have to say that I thought Leeds were creeping up quick, but given we have the best line speed in the league HKR must have been only 5 meters from the ruck to get up as quick as they did. It's fine to penalise offside but there were plenty of time KR were way off with no penalty to Leeds.
Also, very, very inconsistant reffing of when a player is held - both arms off the ground still moving forward is not held, yet Diskin got pinged twice for finishing off a guy in this position.
The Webster try was a much a try as Donalds' effort in the first half. If you are going to give "benefit of the doubt" there was enough there to award Donald's try as well (especially if we want to reward good attacking play Stevo ).

: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:39 am  

Once again our enjoyment of the game was hindered by constant whistle blowing – I’m guessing that Cummings has the word out that that the guys in the middle need to stamp the authority early in the season.

I’m sure it’ll calm down once we get further into the season but for the time being it very frustrating to watch.

Oh and by the way did I mention I was on TV last night?

Re: Rub of the green : Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:54 am  

Lance Cobra wrote:

You try bending the rules you get caned, if Sinfield is persistantly offside he should get persistantly penalised, which tonight for a change he did.

It would be nice if the referee's were consistent when calling for offside. There were many occasions when Hull KR didn't have two feet on the line.

: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:57 am  

LS16_Rhino wrote:

Oh and by the way did I mention I was on TV last night?

Why not sit in front of it to watch it like the rest of us ?

What was it like next to the plant and the goldfish ?

: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:00 am  

Dave Heron's Moustache wrote:

Also, very, very inconsistant reffing of when a player is held - both arms off the ground still moving forward is not held, yet Diskin got pinged twice for finishing off a guy in this position.

I do agree with you that Diskin was very harshly judged for at least two penalties. The first one I remember was one of the very first penalties given against us where he completed a tackle. Stevo described him as "turtling" the HKR player but Diskin simply drove into him with one motion. I personally feel that penalty was mainly the result of crowd pressure as they were screaming louder and louder for infringements.

The second penalty was far worse. Diskin had half completed the tackle and the HKR player was on his knees. The ref hadn't called the tackle complete, the HKR player had both arms free and looked likely to offload. Diskin completed the tackle and Beetham gave a penalty against him for it, basically saying he was interfering after the tackle was complete.

: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:02 am  

Bentham was poor

: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:54 pm  

The Webster no try was a clear knock on IMO, the ball clearly deviated. Plus I think the penalty given against Diskin the lead up to their try was very harsh.

: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:57 pm  

John D H wrote:

The Webster no try was a clear knock on IMO, the ball clearly deviated. Plus I think the penalty given against Diskin the lead up to their try was very harsh.

Wouldn't say it was clear - I've watched it back a few times now and I'm still not convinced.

: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:16 pm  

LS16_Rhino wrote:

Wouldn't say it was clear - I've watched it back a few times now and I'm still not convinced.

Good job you being convinced matters not a jot. Ian Smith clearly thought so and he was the only one who counts.