Saints v Leeds
Saints v Leeds
Is it me, or are Saints being favoured in reffereeing decisions?
I don’t even like Leeds but tonight Hicks seemed to give every decision that he could for Saints.
Thoughts?????
I don’t even like Leeds but tonight Hicks seemed to give every decision that he could for Saints.
Thoughts?????
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1883
- Joined: 22 Jun 2012, 16:48
- Contact:
Re: Saints v Leeds
I think Mr Furner has an opinion on tonight's officiating.
-
lurcher Verified
- Super League Player
- Posts: 10676
- Joined: 19 Aug 2010, 23:25
- Location: bridlington
- Contact:
Re: Saints v Leeds
great game to watch as i thought neither team tried to slow down the play the ball but those couple of bad calls against leeds made all the difference. to be fair to hicks though he did let the game flow.
jo brand is eddie warings love child
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1676
- Joined: 20 Jun 2016, 08:47
- Contact:
Re: Saints v Leeds
Saints seem even quicker this year. They get a roll on very quickly so will get decisions.
- mart0042
- Championship Player
- Posts: 6355
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 15:06
- Location: behind the table in the lab deep under Racoon City.....
- Contact:
Re: Saints v Leeds
Someone has set up a petition to get hicks sacked. Sore losers.
Re: Saints v Leeds
Not really sore losers mart lets be honest we would have been fuming with some of his decisions. He was absolutely crap .mart0042 wrote:Someone has set up a petition to get hicks sacked. Sore losers.
-
Verified
- Moderator
- Posts: 885
- Joined: 21 Dec 2016, 20:09
- Contact:
Re: Saints v Leeds
I didn't think Hicks was great but was very happy with the result.
Re: Saints v Leeds
My main point is the way that the VR was used. It seemed like every Saints decision was sent as ‘try’ and every Leeds decision as ‘no try’
As the VR has to have cast iron proof to overturn the on-field decision it allows an element of favouritism without it appearing too obvious.
If there is an element of doubt, why not just send to the VR as ‘try or no try’ with some indication of where the doubt lies?
Seems a much better system to me.
As the VR has to have cast iron proof to overturn the on-field decision it allows an element of favouritism without it appearing too obvious.
If there is an element of doubt, why not just send to the VR as ‘try or no try’ with some indication of where the doubt lies?
Seems a much better system to me.
- mart0042
- Championship Player
- Posts: 6355
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 15:06
- Location: behind the table in the lab deep under Racoon City.....
- Contact:
Re: Saints v Leeds
I agree but setting up a petition?Dez wrote:Not really sore losers mart lets be honest we would have been fuming with some of his decisions. He was absolutely crap .mart0042 wrote:Someone has set up a petition to get hicks sacked. Sore losers.
You get done
Setting up a petition is a bit much. Every team gets good and bad results and calls.Dez wrote:Not really sore losers mart lets be honest we would have been fuming with some of his decisions. He was absolutely crap .mart0042 wrote:Someone has set up a petition to get hicks sacked. Sore losers.
Its the sending it up as a try or no try thats wrong, either he can see it or he can't.
Re: Saints v Leeds
mart0042 wrote:I agree but setting up a petition?Dez wrote:Not really sore losers mart lets be honest we would have been fuming with some of his decisions. He was absolutely crap .mart0042 wrote:Someone has set up a petition to get hicks sacked. Sore losers.
You get doneEvery time leeds scored he said i have no try on the field and every time saints scored he said i have a try on the field yet he couldn't have seen any of themDez wrote:Not really sore losers mart lets be honest we would have been fuming with some of his decisions. He was absolutely crap .mart0042 wrote:Someone has set up a petition to get hicks sacked. Sore losers.
Setting up a petition is a bit much. Every team gets good and bad results and calls.
Its the sending it up as a try or no try thats wrong, either he can see it or he can't.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 18 guests