Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:57 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

I wouldn’t get too eat up about that decision last night because it’s not worth the energy. I don’t have the energy to even bother with reffing decisions at the moment because much like our appalling goal kicking record, we have other major issues that need addressing first before buying in to Lam blaming that call for our downfall. I thought Mamo timed his jump wrong for the try on half time and nudged Gildart, forcing him in to the error but much like the Marshall one, what is the point in bemoaning it when we can’t break teams down at the other end for love nor money. We’re just not giving ourselves the chance of over coming any dubious calls. They’re all so important to us because the only way we seem capable of winning games against anyone bar there likes of Wakey and Leigh is by keeping the opposition under 10 points.

I thought the same on the Gildart one - and you see other times VR's looking in minute detail if a player is touched etc. when dropping a ball etc. I'd also like a different angle of the Clarke/Partington penalty from the drop out
To me Clarke jumps thinking Partington is going to and actually Partington just stands his ground and Clarke falls over.
No way does Partington "Shepherd" Clarke away from the ball

But - an I think you know my position on Lam from almost day one

10 decent performances in almost 3 years (70ish games) isn't good enough

When were good were actually no better than average
When were average were Poor
And when were poor were Shambolic!!!

We never get more out of a game than we should
Were rubbish

And the Culture has been eroded over the last 2/3 years

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:52 pm  

Grimmy wrote:

As you say, it isn't written down as it is interpretation. They're quite poor at writing laws down, and even worse at communicating them to fans. The nearest comparison I can think of is a stray boot to the head when a defender ends up at the back of the tackle. You will get one of them every round, no penalty and people just say 'bad luck, tough sport'.

I think he's upright there anticipating the ball maybe bouncing in a place where he can kick it on or catch it, or maybe ready to tackle Marshall if he catches it upright. Instead Marshall dives on it at Charnley's feet. I can't get into Charnley's head to know for sure but it does look to me like he genuinely just trips over him at speed. Part of this is that you wouldn't just penalise a kick to the head, if you're saying there's any level of intent/recklessness there then he can't stay on the pitch for doing something so dangerous. If would be red card and ban.

Out of interest, if Hicks had put time off there, how would you expect play to restart? Marshall lost it backwards so can't really give a knock on against him. Do we assume he's tackled and give Wigan the ball back even though he dropped it? Tell Mamo to play it where he picked it up? Go back to the previous play the ball before Wigan threw the bad pass? Give Wigan a fresh set of 6 (play irregularly effected - territorial advantage?)?

No on 2 points

1/ I never said the game should be stopped - Your putting the exact opposite words into my mouth
I'm quite alright him going to the VR 10 seconds later and in the mean time Marshall gets whatever treatment he needs - Where have I said differently ???
You will 100% disagree - but I wrote a couple of weeks ago about referees spending that much time being told stuff that if this happens, this must happen next, reviewing thousands of scenarios thinking the next one will be exactly the same so we MUST do the same thing we practiced for etc. to justify going full time.
When all they need to do is pick their heads up and be allowed to see the game that's in front of them, not what was hypothetically discussed in a class room over and over again weeks/months earlier.
I'm not going to elaborate but that's whats happening here.

Secondly - you say :- " it isn't written down as it is interpretation"
Then say the nearest thing you can come up with is a stray boot at the play the ball - 99% of the time a stray boot at the PTB is on a prone defender who is in and around lying on the floor in the ruck - He isn't in possession of the ball
I've never see a stray boot injure the player in possession of the ball lied on the floor, unless he was intentionally being kicked or a kicking motion to ick the ball was being performed.

But it happened - so you cant draw parallels to a completely different scenario and say it's the same outcome.

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:14 pm  

Cruncher wrote:

That's where the ref went wrong.

An awful lot of people on here are assuming it was an accident (presumably because the offender was Charnley, who usually doesn't know what's going on in front of his nose let alone has time to kick it).

That's a big assumption when something is happening at game-speed.

But it's often been the case that accidental collision with the head has resulted in penalties. Rightly or wrongly, we've all seen it and been infuriated by it dozens of times.

It was typical of Hicks, the most snivelling excuse for a referee we've got (out of a whole selection of them) to choose this occasion to do nothing at all.

He probably wanted his supper - Kendall would still be looking at it now

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:54 pm  

rubber duckie wrote:

Nope. He was acting. Marshall thumped the ground when he lost the ball, as
Mamo was away. The camera followed Mamo and Marshall ground thump wasn’t seen on tv. Unless there is a 4/5 second delay getting ‘clearly knocked out’!?

Philbin was acting also as he walked off the pitch....

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:57 pm  

Grimmy wrote:

Careless isn't the same as accidental. We can talk about whether he was careless/reckless, and if he was then he needs penalising and red carding given the severity of the offence, but an accidental kick is not a penalty no matter how many times people claim it as fact. I've just watched it back this morning, there is less than a second between Marshall dropping to the floor and Charnley making contact. I don't think it's even careless from Charnley, he's just chasing after a loose ball.

the ball wasnt loose

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:55 pm  

After all this arguing I can't understand why Union is more popular and currently miles more watchable....I understand their rules as in any contact with the head is a penalty. We're all debating that. I watched the hockey in the Olympics and the ball can't touch the foot and it's accepted as a rule. Only in rugby League currently is this fact up for debate. There was no intention and it was an accidental.... The level of injury should always be inconsequential. It happened and Marshal failed the his hia. To me it's a penalty as harsh as it is against cjarnley. I don't even blame the ref as rugby League is shooting itself all the time with great ideas...... It's never consistent and therefore this debate is happening. It's why unless you're involved/been brought up with/played the game then no people are attracted to the game. I may be wrong and that's ok, but that's my opinion...... The way I see it contact to the head is a penalty regardless of intent or it's down to the referees discretion. I've been watching rugby League for 32 years and even I don't know what's the right decision. I'm also biased in wigans favour but to be fair the players didn't look like they knew what's happening. I'm trying to be fair here and I understand why Union is more widely watched as the rules can be explained. If I was trying to show a new fan now and explain the rules to them then I really don't know where to start. Sorry for the long message

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:16 pm  

Watching Liam Moore tonight referee Hull vs Leeds and thinking it should be used as a training video for the other refs in how to carry yourself. He is in total control, shows an authority on the field but deals with players in a really respectful manner and has been having a good laugh with them at points.

Absolute chalk and cheese to the on field manner of guys like Thaler, Hicks and especially Child (he could be the training video on how not to carry yourself on the field).

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:16 pm  

Pieman wrote:

Philbin was acting also as he walked off the pitch....

Perhaps he was, but he isn’t putting the team under pressure by not being available next Sunday.

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:24 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

Watching Liam Moore tonight referee Hull vs Leeds and thinking it should be used as a training video for the other refs in how to carry yourself. He is in total control, shows an authority on the field but deals with players in a really respectful manner and has been having a good laugh with them at points.

Absolute chalk and cheese to the on field manner of guys like Thaler, Hicks and especially Child (he could be the training video on how not to carry yourself on the field).

Liam Moore is the best ref in the comp
Has been for 18months

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Thu Jul 29, 2021 10:04 pm  

rubber duckie wrote:

Perhaps he was, but he isn’t putting the team under pressure by not being available next Sunday.

maybe wire will call another game off....if not he wont be available so will be putting them under pressure by not being there