Define!!!!

Don't see what the fuss is about. Yes Bradford had an "extra 3rd tackle" (because he shouted "4th" twice, but it's not as if much extra ground was made, and no confusion was caused, as it seemed nobody on the pitch noticed it either.



I could understand it more if the try was scored because the defenders thought it was the last tackle (i.e. if he had called 5th twice) and had played their last tackle routine, but they didn't. It did not affect what happened on the last scoring play, which Bradford would have done whenever the ref called the last tackle.



the question is what advantage did Bradford gain by having an extra 3rd tackle. The answer is not much at all. It can't fairly be argued to have cost Saints a try.



It is very embarrassing for Child, but otherwise was no big deal, as it happened (though it could have been)

When I pay to watch the rugby, I'm there to be entertained and as such I allow my attention to be largely occupied by the running, passing, big hits, tries etc. I don't really concentrate on the tackle count for each and every set.



If I was paid to, mind...



I'm not actually outraged, by the way, but surely you expect refs, more so than fans, to pick up simple things like tackle counts?

I agree it wasn't a gamebreaker (on this occasion) but a shocking error from a referee.

No.

They're all just letting off steam

Some of these puns really have been first class, the authors must have had a good coach.

Well they should concentrate so we can keep this thread on the tracks and get through the relevant points.

It's clear, Child is a poor conductor of the game.



=#FFFFFFOne for the nostalgics

Personally I've always thought Shaun McRae shows a good knowledge of the rules. He'd probably make a perfect fat controller of the games

you lot are all loco!

Good call that, Loco. Motive perhaps to stop railing against refs, and treat as a signal for shunting the thread into a siding, as it has clearly arrived at the terminus and hit the buffers?