That is what is wrong with the refs.

How they can be constant i dont know when one week they work with radio links and video ref next just radio link and the next back to the old fashioned way no radio links just flags.



It cannot be easy for them the RFL need to get on top of this and maybe just have 3 that work with video and the rest work with radio its not hard to take a portable radio linking set up to grounds that dont have the facility.

Yeah it was Leon, typo

Karl getting the blame for the floods, earthquakes and storms in Asia next

Don't be silly! That's Roberts' fault.

My only concern with this is that it may give a player who has lost the ball in a massive hit the scope to pretend to be knocked out, in order to not concede the knock on.



I am not for a second saying that RL is a game full of cheats or divers, but I would hate to see opportunistic people taking advantage of this.



Perhaps the best way to counteract this is to limit the rule to only include knock ons that have occurred purely after accidental (or indeed deliberant) contact with the head?. I must admit though that as I type this it is apparent that it would be a nightmare to officiate this rule. Perhaps it shoud be restricted to high tackle related knockouts ?.



I do think however that a knock on should be given if a player is knocked out after a "legal" hit and knocks on. This is reward to the defending team for ferocious tackling.

Are you sure, I thought it was Mathers

you can tell when someone is out before they hit the ground and if there is doubt then it should be a knock on.

Yeah, well done to Big Tomkins, his first concern was Riley, rather than the ball.



At least he could walk of the pitch with his brother on Saturday with the consolation of having lost to the team they both supported as young lads.

You may want to try some better bait than that.

That is true, my point is that if the knockout is caused by a legal hit (like Bailey on Mauren) then the knock-on should stand. This gives the attacking player no other choice than to kling on to the ball for dear life (like Tickle after he got smashed of vinnie anderson).



The decision after Riley got clobbered was the correct one (however at the time i was screaming for a knock on) and with hindsight i agree that the rule should perhaps be changed slightly.

Spot on, it was a knock on pure and simple, and was missed, just like a few other things in the game.



Just a couple of things though that have been brought up on the thread.



Firstly, it was not a voluntary tackle. It is entirely legal to dive back into the field of play when close to your own line. If no Wigan player had touched him, the ref would have had to shout to him to get up, but this was irellevant as he was out cold. This is one of the reasons the 'surrender' call was introduced.



Secondly, there was no chance for Tomkins to get the ball, as Riley actually landed on the ball, and it was tucked under his stomach. I think that's why the knock on was missed, as the ball didn't exactly bounce around, it just slid out of his hands and stayed trapped under the ball. Obviously we saw about 20 replays of it which highlighted it.