One thing I've found myself moaning about on Twitter since the restart has been the refereeing, particularly set restarts. It just seems odd and not reflective of how the balance of games are going.

Saints won 42-0 against Wigan. A game they dominated throughout, both territorially and physically. Yet the set restart count was 7-1 (!) in favour of Wigan. How do they explain that? The Saints line was never under pressure, there were almost no breaks or wins of the collision, yet we conceded 7 set restarts. Wigan on the other hand were under a lot of pressure, scrambling round to hold their line and concede only 1? If it were junior/amateur there would be cries of mercy rule refereeing to keep the score down. Woolf has had a moan about it in the press after the Wigan game, but it was a similar situation against Warrington. When Saints were on top in the opening 20 odd minutes, 8-0 up, they were 3-0 behind on set restarts I believe. That game finished 7-1 as well I think. You'd expect Warrington to edge the stats for set restarts as they did the balance of the game.

I've noticed it in games other than Saints as well, one teams seems to get hammered at times and there's no consistency with how each team are refereed, even within the same game. Are some sides coached to give full penalties away and not set restarts as you are more likely to defend a penalty with a set line of defenders than a set restart? Or is just an issue with the standard of refereeing and they struggle for consistency in the same game never mind between games and referees?

More importantly, what did you think of the tackle that ended Jack Wells evening ?

Is it just that Saints are offending more than opponents?

Good god your not suggesting that the problem could be with the players rather than the refs. Mebbe saints were quite happy giving away sets at the tackle to ensure defensive line set properly

Nah. Deffo been victimised.

Just like cas obviously, everyone picks on em

Wait. Is the argument that if a team is dominating the match physically, as well as in terms of possession (and territory) it can’t be offending at the ruck/ptb, leading to set restarts?

Or that a team being physically dominated *must* commit more ruck offences?

Because I’m not sure I see the logic there, tbh.

Logic and a Saddened thread never go hand in hand.

How many were on the 1st or 2nd tackle as opposed to the 5th or 6th? Perhaps some teams are prepared to do it to slow the PTB early in the count.

The set restarts do seem a bit random to be honest.

It is a new rule so there is bound to be inconsistencies, however the referees do need to get things in order sooner rather than later.

An unfortunate accident. Players were taking a run up and hitting the legs before this season, so we are moving in the right direction in terms of player safety.

When it was first introduced I thought it was quite good, quicker games, quite exciting.

Then, I went off the idea. Ref's were giving it for absolutely everything, massive changes in momentum occurring and with the fatigue setting in with players, I thought that as a spectable, it was garbage. No intensity (which is what RL is all about), and just poor games in general.

I think recently it has got a bit better, but when there is a set restart I automatically think "Would that have been a penalty before Set Restarts were introduced" and I don't think that half of them would be