Unless changed this Rule will kill the game and Brian Nobles 5 Drives and a Kick will bore everyone to death.

Rewarding crap defence at the moment. The Dorn no try and the Sutcliffe no try last night are both shocking decisions.

all these try's disallowed for obstruction, how come the very same thing isn't being penalized 80 yards down the field?
im pretty sure nearly every set would have some sort of obstruction but are very rarely, if ever, given.
is it only obstruction if its in the opponents '20?

The whole clue as to what should be looked at is in the name of the rule, is a player obstructed? No? Then it's a try. The RFL are trying to get rid of dummy runners and rewarding terrible defensive reads, it's embarrassing.

What was the difference between the Dorn no try and the try that was given? Inconsistent and poor interpretation.

surely good attacking play should be rewarded in those instances? if a player deliberately obstructs a defender then yes have a look but most of them are just poor defensive reads.
very poor

If this match wasn't on TV, both of those tries would have been given. That's the problem.

The decision to give Clare's try very much felt like "I disallowed one, so I better give this one."

Both. BTW I think should've been given, that just what I felt Thaler thinking was. The speed of the decision to say Bowen had definitely charged down after just one long shot view was iffy, he did then try a second closer angle but seemed to have already made his mind up and wasn't going to reverse it.

There was an interesting comment in commentary in the Wigan Cas game. I think it was made by noble.

He said the coaches and officials had a meeting to clarify the obstruction rule. Since then there seem to have been a lot more penalties given for it. I think the refs are now applying the letter of the law rather than applying commen sense.

To be fair the 2nd try (that was given) Shenton did knock on in the build up so it evened it's self out in the end.

Agree with an earlier poster. Unless a defender is obstructed from making a tackle that would have stopped the try, then the try should be awarded. I don't see why anything else should be considered.

And what about players wandering about in front of the fullback to shield him from the would be tackler?

How on earth is a team supposed to defend against 3 dummy runners hitting their line while the player with the ball goes round the back. Bring back players and moves with some skill involved instead of just running half your team empty handed into the defensive line.