The camera in front was from the right and it looked to go over the post. ...that says to me it was a good kick.

The rear camera slightly to the left shows the kick within the sticks.

You cannot change the laws of physics. ..that was a goal.

The Lancashire mafia strikes again.....what do the RFL have against teams from across the Pennines?

Now if this was a try or no try situation, then the issue of "benefit of the doubt" would be raised. I don't think it would be feasible for that to come into play when it comes to a drop goal, but it begs the question, if BOTD is only available for one particular point scoring effort, then what's the point in having it if it's not available for everything....

What we really need is video playback after every dubious move, then we can eliminate every error that occurs. In fact, we could do away with the on field ref completely and just wire up all the players to a panel of judges in the commentary box.



"No, no, just hang on a minute Danny, we are just re-winding the video, and........yes,.... in fact allowing for the camera angle and wind strength it missed the left post by 2.5 cm. Sorry "

But the decision in knockout rugby effects more than a SL game. Things like that can even themselves out across a season.

Anything that in that situation gets the correct result I welcome.

Awful decision - From the body language of the players, the only person on the pitch who believed it wasn't a drop goals seems to be Bentham.

One thing I've always struggled to understand is how short the uprights are in League at many grounds, including our own.



As for whether it was a a good drop goal, I'd have to say yes. Doesn't matter now, however!

Until I got home an hour ago I didn't think you could go to the VR on such occasions. Having seen the various angles I don't think you should be able to. I don't understand how people are talking with such certainty as I genuinely can't decide whether it went over or not. If I was Smith and the decision was referred to me I would have to send it back down as ref's call.



In these situations I think we just have to respect the decision on the field. Who'd be a ref!

I'm completely with you on this.

...........so refer it upstairs to get a second opinion on a crucial moment, if the call comes back indecisive THEN disallow it. Don't just wave it away and toddle off with your nose in the air and a superior smirk on your lips.



I doubt anyone would be quite so magnanimous if it had happened to us! I certainly wouldn't.

The big difference for me is that the angle in front was not central whereas the camera from the rear was of a decent height and dead ; that should be the only angle that mattered. Bentham was too close, not ed and at way too low an angle to accurately say if it was a drop goal or not. At the very, very least he should have referred it upstairs. As RD said: this isn't just 2 points; it's an entire competition Hudds have been screwed out of.

With regard to Bentham, does anyone care to explian how Walsh got a penalty against McGillivary when it was a penalty to Huddersfield? And what for? It changed the momentum of the game.



PS no way Bentham could have judged that drop goal , he was looking straight upwards at a tight angle. At best an idiot, at worst corrupt.