Very interesting reading the comments made on other clubs forms ie, Hull KR, Wigan, Warrington to name but a few regarding our game at St. Helens. Without exception there is unanimous condemnation of the appalling and biased refereeing and video judging to name but just two areas where we completely shafted. I personally believe there is an agenda in favour of certain 'popular' clubs and one against 'less fashionable' clubs which appears to be perpetuated in others ways by Sky TV. I hope that we don't appear on Sky again for a long time if only to see referees being made to make up their own minds and back their own judgement instead of constantly referring to a bloody replay for every decision. While non-league football is my first love I do enjoy RL as my second sport but I do find it very difficult to stomach seeing us being on the wrong end of so many decisions week in and week out by what is basically inept or corrupt refereeing. The standard of officiating even at non-league football is way ahead of what I see in Super League.

Don't get me wrong, Saints deserved their win based on their 2nd half performance even though we bossed the 1st with a superb display. Just a pity it wasn't even numbers for each side on the night.

I'm a Saints fan so its hard to be unbiased but I didn't see any major problems. Certainly, every video decision was correct. The ref made one howler awarding us a penalty for ball-stealing but it didn't affect the result.

Above everything else, Gibson's try that wasn't, should of been a penalty not a 3rd tackle attack!

I totally agree with you. I think blaming refs and officials is totally unfair and pure blinkeredness, the decisions were correct on the night, no doubt. Salford second half display was shocking. no leader when backs are against the wall, and poor discipline giving too many penalties away and also poor ball retension with many errors.

Meh. You could argue for a high tackle I suppose and a penalty awarded would give them 3 more tackles. But not a penalty try as the ball wasn't grounded. So, not a massive impact on the game.

That wasn't the only decision, Silverwood missed calls for both teams. It was coincidence that the ones he missed for Salford were bigger calls and giving the visitors the impression you were piggy backed up the field.



I believe you would of won the game in the end without any referee input as Salford were begining to get tired and Saints are good at capatilising on that but had Salford got their calls the scoreline wouldn't have been so lop sided giving a fairer view of how the game was played. As it stands to anyone who didn't watch the game the score reflects a Saints text book win, which couldn't be any further away from the truth.

Been on it all day, went today and was so proud of the lads. Roby got about as much down as Gibson did, yet saints get awarded the try????? Whats all that about???????????















Overall saints deserved it, don't think we touched the ball in the second half, but the penalty count didn't help. Anyway lets get more of us to Widnes next week. Great noise by the 200 or so travelling reds couldn't have asked for anymore from fans and players alike!!!

You could argue that had Lance Ohio not tackled Gibson round the head he would have been able to get the ball down.This is where the penalty try rule is inadequate because it was this illegal challenge which helped prevent the try.

As for blinkeredness Phil any refusal to amur that the ref had some influence on the game is just that. At crucial stages Salford ee pinned back by penalties which Saints never had to deal wroth. According to Mr Silverwood Saints didn't pass the ball forward but we did, they didn't slow the play the ball down but we did, they weren't inside the ten at kicks but we were. All these things are things that go on fire both teams in every game but when they only get called one way they give you a lot to do. Salford got tired as a result of defending too much and Saints took advantage.

what about the blatant wilkin knock on at the play the ball that resulted in a try

Have to disagree. The saints player grabbed on the shirt around the chest area and it was the saints players momentum that took his arm over the shoulder to the neck area. If he had initially hit the neck I would have said penalty.



From a neutral the vid ref got it spot on.



Also, not sure about downward pressure on one of the saints tries.



Fact is 80 minute game, Salford played for 50-60 minutes. Saints were alot better than Salford in the second half and deserved the points. Positive first half for the reds and something to build on.

Saints fullback couldn't have caught him any sweeter around the head or did you not see him come in as second man? The first defender gave a fair tackle but Lance Hohaia clearly made contact with the head making it a high tackle, I'll link you to the rules if it helps your understanding of them?

I saw it yes hohaia (who I thought was terrified of running it back in at times btw) came round the back of gibson who was heading for a try.



He first off put his arm round the shoulder and hohaia's hand grabbed gibsons shirt on chest area then his arm started riding up to the neck/head area as Gibson fell closer to the floor.



Gibson was in a falling/diving motion. Hohaia did well to prevent the try.

What difference does it make if he came in second man?? Gibson was in a falling motion straight to 4 points so hohaia scrambled back and tried his best to change gibsons momentum which he did.