Peter Fox Sin Binning. : Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:19 pm  

Why was that given? There were continuous offences commited by the Leeds players and we get punished for it? So Fox commits it once and gets punished for it. It's pretty inconsistant refeering in my book, the only possible thing he could have done was warn both teams. Didn't think he had a word with both the captains though?

I cannot believe we won the penalty count either, but that's little reward with the major and decisive decisions going against us.

Still, very impressed again by Fox.

[Kosh]

Re: Peter Fox Sin Binning. : Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:22 pm  

BringBackRugbyLeagueBiff wrote:

Why was that given? There were continuous offences commited by the Leeds players and we get punished for it? So Fox commits it once and gets punished for it. It's pretty inconsistant refeering in my book, the only possible thing he could have done was warn both teams. Didn't think he had a word with both the captains though?

I cannot believe we won the penalty count either, but that's little reward with the major and decisive decisions going against us.

Still, very impressed again by Fox.

Fox got done for a professional foul (and correctly so) not persistent offside/laying on.

I have no idea how you can moan about the ref. Bentham did his level best to hand you the game on a plate.

Re: Peter Fox Sin Binning. : Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:23 pm  

Kosh wrote:

Fox got done for a professional foul (and correctly so) not persistent offside/laying on.

I have no idea how you can moan about the ref. Bentham did his level best to hand you the game on a plate.

That's a bit OTT, granted he gave us more penalties then Leeds yes.

The major decision was ruled out from Ian Smith!

Also, you don't think Sinfield or one or 2 other Leeds players should have been given 10mins for 'persistantly offending'?

[Kosh]

Re: Peter Fox Sin Binning. : Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:28 pm  

BringBackRugbyLeagueBiff wrote:

That's a bit OTT, granted he gave us more penalties then Leeds yes.

The major decision was ruled out from Ian Smith!

Also, you don't think Sinfield or one or 2 other Leeds players should have been given 10mins for 'persistantly offending'?

TBH in one respect it was quite refreshing to see Leeds pulled up for offside so regularly when they usually get away with it.

However, I don't think Bentham was consistent and should have penalised Rovers more for interference. Generally he just seemed to spot every infringement from Leeds but let similar play from Rovers pass.

As far as more sin-bins are concerned - the one did the trick.

If by 'major decision' you mean the Webster knock-on, that was correctly given by the VR.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:30 pm  

He deserved it professional foul end for stopping Mcguire quick play the ball...correct decision...i don't know can't even beat a depleated Leeds outfit while having the ref on your side also......oh dear!

Re: Peter Fox Sin Binning. : Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 pm  

Kosh wrote:

TBH in one respect it was quite refreshing to see Leeds pulled up for offside so regularly when they usually get away with it.

However, I don't think Bentham was consistent and should have penalised Rovers more for interference. Generally he just seemed to spot every infringement from Leeds but let similar play from Rovers pass.

As far as more sin-bins are concerned - the one did the trick.

If by 'major decision' you mean the Webster knock-on, that was correctly given by the VR.

You can't give a balanced view of that considering the cameras tend to only focus on the ptb. If it showed the defensive line you may think differently.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:51 pm  

Professional foul ten metres out. Had to go to the bin. bentham was shocking though and hammered leeds in the penalty count. It got even worse after sinfield's hissy fit in the 1st half

Re: Peter Fox Sin Binning. : Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:14 pm  

Kosh wrote:

TBH in one respect it was quite refreshing to see Leeds pulled up for offside so regularly when they usually get away with it.

However, I don't think Bentham was consistent and should have penalised Rovers more for interference. Generally he just seemed to spot every infringement from Leeds but let similar play from Rovers pass.

As far as more sin-bins are concerned - the one did the trick.

If by 'major decision' you mean the Webster knock-on, that was correctly given by the VR.

Thaught Bentham had a decent game to be honest and yes the vr ruled out the Webster effort and rightly so there was definately a cheeky little knock on in there

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:30 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

Professional foul ten metres out. Had to go to the bin. bentham was shocking though and hammered leeds in the penalty count. It got even worse after sinfield's hissy fit in the 1st half

yup, rovers got off lightly

Re: Peter Fox Sin Binning. : Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:35 pm  

BringBackRugbyLeagueBiff wrote:

Why was that given? There were continuous offences commited by the Leeds players and we get punished for it? So Fox commits it once and gets punished for it. It's pretty inconsistant refeering in my book, the only possible thing he could have done was warn both teams. Didn't think he had a word with both the captains though?

I cannot believe we won the penalty count either, but that's little reward with the major and decisive decisions going against us.

Still, very impressed again by Fox.

Professional foul matey at the end of the day.

Technically it was the right call.