Congratulations M. Poite!

[Smudge]

I couldn't agree more. His is an exceptional ref.
To date, I haven't seen anyone as good since Clive Norling. Well played Sir.

[Mad_dog]

Dam! You beat me to it!

I would like to add that there are quite a few English refs that could do with a lesson or two from Mr Poite.

What a difference he made to the game. It was so much more enjoyable to watch. Thank you...

Iain

[Bill W (2)]

Concur with above. Merci M'sieur!

[Purebob]

One bit I particularly loved was where Tigers had a scrum v on the cat side before half time and the Treviso loosehead kept collapsing inwards claiming loudly Cole was boring. Mr. Poite came round the right side and shock! Horror! it held up and Treviso were duly pushed over. Its a good ref when players won't cheat in the scum cos they know they'll get busted !
Even my ever-critical son had nothing bad to say about Poite.

[taffyboiy]

Yep, another big thumbs up from me, M Poite is the standard to which all the others should aspire.

Tho it will be interesting to see if the forums are as kind after he's reffed us in a game we've lost by a whisker

[parkerd68]

I generally agree but can anyone confirm why Slater was binned. I was unsighted but I think he tackled their 3 foot 8 full back and therefore I can only assume that it was for a high tackle. I watched for a signal but didn't see one.

[Sherpa2]

I generally agree but can anyone confirm why Slater was binned. I was unsighted but I think he tackled their 3 foot 8 full back and therefore I can only assume that it was for a high tackle. I watched for a signal but didn't see one.

Pretty sure it was for a trip.

[DickyP]

M Poite pointed to his foot implying it was for illegal use of feet!

Just checked the Sky+ recording - definitely for use of the leg in making the tackle.

[BJ.]

I generally agree but can anyone confirm why Slater was binned. I was unsighted but I think he tackled their 3 foot 8 full back and therefore I can only assume that it was for a high tackle. I watched for a signal but didn't see one.

I listened to it a couple of times on my recording of the game and I think M. Poite said Slater 'tackled with the boot'. Perhaps it lost a little bit in translation.

[Tiger_in_Birmingham]

Another good game from Mr Poite.

The only comment I have is that I thought the second Treviso yellow was a tad harsh.

Crane was tackled without the ball however the ball was in flight and he was only a couple of yards from the try line.

Had the defender waited 1 more step the tackle would have been very well timed to wrap as Crane caught the ball and could possibly have stopped hime short of the line. We are talking about half a second, at most, being the difference between legal or not.

Definite penalty but I didn't feel it was cynical enough for a yellow as the guy had to get Crane early to prevent momentum taking them both over the line.

[fleabane]

. . .and that is why it was a yellow! It could also have been a penalty try!

[Tiger_in_Birmingham]

. . .and that is why it was a yellow! It could also have been a penalty try!

If Mr Poite felt that it was not a penalty try therefore he felt that Crane might not have made the line - all the more reason that it could be considered mistimed

The fact that the tackler may have prevented Crane from scoring does nothing to indicate whether it was cynical or not, only their positions on the field relative to the try line

[Bill W (2)]

The fact that the tackler may have prevented Crane from scoring does nothing to indicate whether it was cynical or not, only their positions on the field relative to the try line

IRB guidelines are that penalty offences in the "red zone" albeit not necessarily penalty tries are to result in a yellow card.

Poite was right. Crane might have knocked on; tripped over his shoelaces; failed to ground the ball etc - hence no penalty try. But it was a clear tackle without the ball hence penalty and only a few yards from the line - hence yellow card.