"Transparency, consistency and fairness"



Fuck me, how did he manage to write that. Orwellian doublethink at its finest.

Highly predictable but no more true now than it was last night.

[url=http://www.sportinglife.com/rugby-league/news/article/480/9233092/jon-sharp-defends-steve-ganson-over-dressing-room-actionsHere's some more closing of ranks on the issue at Wakey.[/url



I'm afraid the game is up to a great degree and nothing that the RFL hit back with will change the minds of the majority of clubs and fans alike.

Totally agree. It's scandalous that they think a statement like that which actually doesn't say anything will placate fans and clubs. They really must think we are stupid.

Nothing in that brief RFL statement that addresses any of the concerns raised by Neil's own statement...



However, it does highlight a combination of complacency and self-satisfaction...

A typical RFL statement then

Whiting is having his say too so it's clearly an issue for the players as well: www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Richard- ... story.html

Whiting is having his say too so it's clearly an issue for the players as well: www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Richard- ... story.html

According to the RFL statement "players are more accountable for their actions than ever before".



However referees and RFL officials aren't accountable to anyone.

And therein lies the root of the problem.

More b*llox from the RFL...



"But there is plenty of discussion to be had about how the first half has gone and rightly so. You want to encourage dialogue between the referee and his touch judges and, when you have someone of Steve's experience and knowledge at the game in an official capacity, I think he has every right to go into that dressing room."



What about the other games played in this round? It's seems a rather 'hit & miss' policy...



"There is absolutely no point in having the referees coach in the ground sat there for 80 minutes with no presence about the dressing room area. It's nothing new, I'm a little bit surprised it's hit the headlines."



Again, it's just a matter of fortune (good or bad) that the referees coach is at a particular game...



"What he's said is irrelevant. It was a real ambiguous statement to say the game changed in the second half. We are talking about a fantastic St Helens team who were just behind on scoreboard."



Had Mr Ganson NOT visited the referee at HT there wouldn't have been any kind of ambiguity would there Jon?

That first bit makes no sense at all, unless Ganson went into the dressing room to say "Ref, speak to your touch judges. Touch judges, speak to the ref" and then left.



On the second bit, why has he gone to the ground at all? If it's an official monitoring visit, just say so.

Well said. For me, the time and place to scrutinise a refs performance is after the match, not during it.