It's was once, and that wasn't for a breach of the 10m!

8 - 3 penalty count and you're moaning about that?!

Yes, it should have been far higher. Not really a surprise given the way Wire play the game, it gets to this time of the year, and people seem to forget about slow play the balls.



Despite Eddie Hemmings giving his usual anti Wire bias there is no conclusive evidence that Lineham drops it. After Thaler gives no try to the last Saints try, there is no clear view of the grounding - so no try, there is a clear knee in the way, regardless of what the obvious outcome is. I've been moaning to anyone who will listen about how ridiculous this 'try' 'no try' on the field decision is. If there is the slightest doubt, let the video referee decide without any on field influence. The video referee has the best view, let them decide, without having the poorly sighted referees decision having any sort of influence.



The best team won. Now the Wire.

It's not about what the count [iwas[/i it's what the count [ishould have[/i been. The infringements by either side should have seen a 25-6 penalty count or something, they were spoiling at every opportunity and it kept the game close. We would have dicked them if it had been ref'd properly as the territory stats would have made for a very different game than what Thaler allowed.

Thats exactly how Cummings saw it and said Thaler got that one wrong, if this is going to creep into the game then the half backs chip over the defensive line and regather is going to be scrutinised.

It was palmed back by Walsh to a warrington player anyway so no big deal in the end.

Don’t think he was too bad, should probably have referred the Lineham try up, but then then the use of the video referee in SL is approaching high farce, so may not have made any difference. The RFL seriously need to review the current protocol. At the moment the actual interpretation being used is that to overturn the on-field decision they must have incontrovertible, irrefutable, overwhelming proof, which goes way, way beyond what is reasonable, way beyond the balance of actual evidence, even way beyond what is actually plausible. The result of this is that video referees are confirming on-field decisions that are highly implausible based on the available evidence. It’s just silly, not how a professional sport should work.

I thought Thaler was average at best.

Agree keep the VR but do not let the ref make a decision on it if he is not sure leave it to the VR not the ref

TH RFL will do what they always do; copy the Aussies, but do it less well. Everyone moans about "try/ no try" now, but they'd probably say, well, it works fairly well in the NRL. Well, yes it does (although that doesn't stop Aussie fans moaning plenty), but I suspect that means it's more about the quality of the officials than it is the rules in place, and their refs, and VR set-up, are generally much better than ours.



Is there any footage of the, ahem, highlights online anywhere?

I thought Thaler had a pretty decent game overall, yes, he made mistakes but a ref will never put in a perfect performance.



In some ways the ref can't win, they get criticised for not making decisions then criticised for not handing it up to the VR. If he nor the touch judge didn't see any reason the hand the Lineham try up then I've no problem him giving it (easily said given I'm not a St Helens fan).



The problem I have is with both the VR and the system. The VR should not be getting decicions wrong as he has the time and the technology to make sure he gets it right. I hate the system of handing it up as a try/no try. Should be If the ref isn't sure hand it up for the VR to make a decision. Of the VR isn't sure which can happen in rare cases we go with ref's call.

Scrapping the barrel here. That's one decision. I've never seen a defensive go unpunished for so long for being in front of the ref. That kept them in the game. There forwards would have had it by half time if they'd had to go the full 10.