Yesterday’s clash between the Souths Sydney Rabbitohs and Canterbury Bulldogs proved one thing beyond all doubt. There is nothing in sport that creates a stir like a contentious refereeing decision.

And while it doesn’t get much more controversial than a last minute penalty goal in front of the posts to win the game, you’d be forgiven for thinking we were dealing with the crucifixion of the Messiah.

Indeed, it seems appropriate that the most debated and disputed call in years took place on this most holy of weekends.

Rather than rocks being thrown at Jesus on the cross at Golgotha a little over two thousand years ago, we had an angry mob hurling bottles at ANZ. In this instance it was referee Gerard Sutton being crucified.

Fittingly, it was the reputation of Sutton and his team of match officials that was resurrected last night after being vindicated by the rugby league media at large.

None other than Bill Harrigan, Pope of referees, decreed that Sutton had made the right call. According to Harrigan, while carrying out a charge down the player cannot, under any circumstances, come into contact with the kickers legs.

After consulting the rulebook, however, it’s not so cut and dry.

At no point are the legs of the kicker mentioned. More telling, however, are these two passages:

Section 15, Point 1, Note 1. (j): “a tackler cannot be expected to delay making a tackle because the player in possession might decide to kick the ball. The onus is on the kicker to get his kick in before his opponent commits himself to the tackle.”

Section 13, Point 10. (a): “If a player fouls an opponent who is attempting a drop goal, a penalty kick shall be awarded in front of the goal posts.”

That last passage is pretty clear. But, what defines a foul? Surely some level of intent.

There’s one other thing that the media at large and just about every fan agree upon. James Graham’s only intent was to get his hands on the ball.