: Mon May 11, 2009 9:32 am  

saintc wrote:

We're top of the league and in the semi finals of the CC

That will do me mate.

The whole of SL will be laughing their heads off as you come a cropper in both competitions.

If the RFL weren't so weak Saints would surely be facing some kind of disciplinary for treating the Magic Weekend with utter contempt.

You and your club obviously think you are a cut above everyone else.

: Mon May 11, 2009 9:38 am  

saintc wrote:

We're top of the league and in the semi finals of the CC

That will do me mate.

So Sts have a "by" from the quarter finals, straight to the semi`s eh?

: Mon May 11, 2009 9:40 am  

saintc wrote:

no

the difference is that the feet are on the ground for one example and not the other. This really isnt that difficult. In addition, to take advantage of that restart thing you have to have one foot out and the other in the field of play, dont you?

My apologies, you are correct. As for the one foot out, I thought they had changed that rule? Certianly in the case of having one foot behind the dead ball line from kick-offs, somethiong that Phil Howlett did to great effect.

: Mon May 11, 2009 9:48 am  

sally cinnamon wrote:

It's a shame RL has no strong willed personalities like Ballack and Drogba to stand up against refereeing injustice.

Morgan did and got a 4K fine they need to look at the refs performances they need dropping when they have a poor game. t.allibert was poor in our game wrongly giving a 20m tap instead of a scrum twice but the lines men where just as bad. hence the need for 2 refs in the modern game like the Nrl

: Mon May 11, 2009 9:55 am  

HKR Tribal wrote:

Morgan did and got a 4K fine they need to look at the refs performances they need dropping when they have a poor game. t.allibert was poor in our game wrongly giving a 20m tap instead of a scrum twice but the lines men where just as bad. hence the need for 2 refs in the modern game like the Nrl

Two referees won't improve their decision making.

: Mon May 11, 2009 9:57 am  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

It was never afforded the opportunity to be a contest. That decision from the kick-off was one of the worst I have ever witnessed, compounded by the fact he conferred with his touch judge!

the decision from the kick off was correct....Pelo jumped from within the field and touched the ball, which then landed into touch. Had he just left it, it would have been a Catalans scrum, he had no need to jump for it.

Join the list of Pelo, Noble, Kear, French and Davies who dont know the rules.

: Mon May 11, 2009 10:01 am  

saints35 bulls0 wrote:

the decision from the kick off was correct....Pelo jumped from within the field and touched the ball, which then landed into touch. Had he just left it, it would have been a Catalans scrum, he had no need to jump for it.

Join the list of Pelo, Noble, Kear, French and Davies who dont know the rules.

Have you deliberately chosen to ignore the past three pages?

: Mon May 11, 2009 10:03 am  

...as for the two 50/50 balls, they were just that - they could have been given either way. The ref probably should have given a clearer indication of what he intended to give.

Although Carlaw did knock on before the 2nd one, so it would have been a Saints scrum anyway.

: Mon May 11, 2009 11:33 am  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

Have you deliberately chosen to ignore the past three pages?

no - but i probably should have read the whole thread before jumping in at the first idiotic post.

: Mon May 11, 2009 11:53 am  

The decision for the scrum was correct however from listening in on the conversation between Thaler and the TJ on teh tv commentary (and I'm sure SC can confirm that) they concluded that a Catalan player touched the ball before it bounced into touch.

I wouldn't have given the Wellans try either, Graham clearly loses the the ball trying to put it down, it only goes backwards as the Catalan's players hand is there; what is the defender meant to do, not try to hold the ball up?