A New Low for Pro 12 Referees

First topic message reminder :

[Edited so we don't get in trouble]

Something needs done here and quickly or the credibility of a bloody good competition is gone.

Out of interest, what's the difference having a 'bunker' and having them in a van at the ground? Can't the TV companies change the feed the big screens if you don't want it?

I think the idea is to employ neutral TMO's which would be much easier if they didn't have to travel. It would also mean a league could be more selective in their choice of TMO's. Not having to rely on home teams, or home nations, to provide the TMO.

The article is suggesting, I think, that broadcast directors can at present be selective in choosing which angles to show. What they would like is someone independent to have access too around 9 different angles via computer software.

I suppose I don't really understand the neutral bit because my focus is the league under one union. But surely they're going to have to travel to this 'bunker' anyway. Or will they be at home on the phone with a laptop? Not sure how literal the 'bunker' bit is.

Seems like it's trying to solve a problem that shouldn't really be a problem. From reading comments on here it seems there needs to be an education in the some of the referees/TMO in what they're supposed to be doing/asking.

The fact a TMO has ruled no-try in response to a "any reason I can't award" question based on it not being conclusive is simply wrong and it doesn't matter where they are or what they're looking at. Asking whether there's any reason you can't award the try when you're not sure about the grounding is wrong. Again, doesn't matter where they are if the they (they whole ref team) are clear are what they're doing.

Don't get me wrong, improving the technology for the TMO is surely a good thing but it seems like it's fixing the sail when the boats sinking.

There are less advantages for a one nation league under one union. PRO12 and S15 would be similar with each other in having different unions and different broadcasters, and so accusations of bias, cheating, etc are probably more likely in these two leagues. Ref Bunker just might help deal with that.

The article does say that the Bunker will be off site, so the TMO wouldn't be at the game at all. Where the TMO Box will be situated off site I haven't a clue, but the fact that it can be off site should mean that any TMO does not need to be in the same country. At least that's the way I read it.

Even if all TMO were great at what they do, and even if they never made mistakes, there will always be those that accuse TMO's of bias and cheating. Not that TMO's are perfect, I have seen them make mistakes, and some so bad it would be hard to argue against bias being a factor in their decision making.

I think it's a great idea for several reasons, and think it could prove a real positive for PRO12, if it comes our way.
Not sure about your boat analogy. I think officiating needs an overhaul world wide, but I wouldn't go as for as to describe it as a sinking ship. Well not just yet.

Not sure how it is in the Pro12 but we tend to have 3 guys acting as TMO in all the games (at least the televised ones, sometimes more than three games are on at once so not sure who does it then). I think it helps having specialists.

I could have worded, "There are less advantages for a one nation league under one union", better. What I meant was that with more nations, and those nations broadcasters, involved in S15 and PRO12, there's likely more claims of cheating and bias in those two leagues, and so this Ref Bunker would probably make a greater difference to those two leagues, than it would the AP.

There's only ever one TMO named in PRO12 games, although there is more than one person in the TMO box. It would be a big help having specialists, I think. Sometimes I have the impression that some of our TMO's aren't very competent. I really want to see it change.

A lot of this comes down to money. The TMO gets paid £200 plus expenses per game. If those expenses have to include flights and accommodation the whole thing becomes a burden for a cash strapped league.
Having a remote "bunker" say at a broadcaster's studios that will already have superfast fibre links seems a good option.

Munchkin, sorry. I meant when have the same three guys rotating. Not three at the same game.

I should have realised that. It makes good sense for the AP. It wouldn't be as practical for PRO12 to do because of the travel involved, and this is one reason I think Ref Bunker might prove a real advantage for PRO12 officiating.

The Great Aukster wrote:A lot of this comes down to money. The TMO gets paid £200 plus expenses per game. If those expenses have to include flights and accommodation the whole thing becomes a burden for a cash strapped league.
Having a remote "bunker" say at a broadcaster's studios that will already have superfast fibre links seems a good option.

It does seem a good option, but I'm not sure about the costs involved. The article seems to suggest that it won't be cheap, but maybe this is the initial costs of setting Ref Bunker up. If they're not relying on the broadcasters feed, I would think they have to install their own camera's to get the 9 angles, someone to place those camera's, as well as the cost of the software and so on. I don't know how Hawk-eye which is being tried works, but I would think it's similar?

So after the Scarlets lodged their concerns over the disgraceful refereeing performance by Leighton Hodges, it seems that apparently the majority of the incidents raised were admittedly seen as legitimate, and as a result Leighton Hodges has been demoted from refereeing for 2 weeks, and will only be allowed to be an assistant referee.

While it is quite sad that it has come to this level of action, due to the standards of refereeing in this league being so low, if this information is correct then I think we have to applaud whoever made this decision, and also applaud the transparency. Well done Pro12.

I need a lie down Chunky has praised the Pro12

Surely World Peace is just round the corner

Chunky Norwich wrote:So after the Scarlets lodged their concerns over the disgraceful refereeing performance by Leighton Hodges, it seems that apparently the majority of the incidents raised were admittedly seen as legitimate, and as a result Leighton Hodges has been demoted from refereeing for 2 weeks, and will only be allowed to be an assistant referee.

While it is quite sad that it has come to this level of action, due to the standards of refereeing in this league being so low, if this information is correct then I think we have to applaud whoever made this decision, and also applaud the transparency. Well done Pro12.

One refereeing performance out of how many? The reason Scarlets raised it was because of the consistency of previous refs so the standards seem to be higher than you make out

http://m.southwalesargus.co.uk/sport/14122583.Dragons_write_to_Pro12_ref_chiefs_to_complain_about_controversial_calls/

Lyn's got it in for Mitrea. Understandably.

Stone Motif wrote:http://m.southwalesargus.co.uk/sport/14122583.Dragons_write_to_Pro12_ref_chiefs_to_complain_about_controversial_calls/

Lyn's got it in for Mitrea. Understandably.

To be fair, 3 of the cards were justified, and although the 4th was soft an argument could be made for it being a yellow.

The Dragons scrum was completely annihilated, so 2 yellows is probably fair. The 2nd one was unexpected given that specific scrum looked more like a 50/50 collapse, but given they had been put through the ringer all game the ref didn't have much choice. The 2nd actually made it uncontested scrums when Edinburgh were looking for a penalty try so it actually lost them the advantage!

The 3rd yellow was the most blatant example of coming into the side of a maul that you could see - given it was 5m out of should have been a penalty try too.

The 4th was soft and a non-dangerous tip tackle, but he lifted the legs above horizontal so the precedent is there.

So really he needs to get his own house in order instead of blaming the ref!

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:http://m.southwalesargus.co.uk/sport/14122583.Dragons_write_to_Pro12_ref_chiefs_to_complain_about_controversial_calls/

Lyn's got it in for Mitrea. Understandably.

To be fair, 3 of the cards were justified, and although the 4th was soft an argument could be made for it being a yellow.

The Dragons scrum was completely annihilated, so 2 yellows is probably fair. The 2nd one was unexpected given that specific scrum looked more like a 50/50 collapse, but given they had been put through the ringer all game the ref didn't have much choice. The 2nd actually made it uncontested scrums when Edinburgh were looking for a penalty try so it actually lost them the advantage!

The 3rd yellow was the most blatant example of coming into the side of a maul that you could see - given it was 5m out of should have been a penalty try too.

The 4th was soft and a non-dangerous tip tackle, but he lifted the legs above horizontal so the precedent is there.

So really he needs to get his own house in order instead of blaming the ref!

Yep Edinburgh really are that good. All hail the recent resurgence in Scottish Rugby. Are you Andy Nicole?

Stone Motif wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:http://m.southwalesargus.co.uk/sport/14122583.Dragons_write_to_Pro12_ref_chiefs_to_complain_about_controversial_calls/

Lyn's got it in for Mitrea. Understandably.

To be fair, 3 of the cards were justified, and although the 4th was soft an argument could be made for it being a yellow.

The Dragons scrum was completely annihilated, so 2 yellows is probably fair. The 2nd one was unexpected given that specific scrum looked more like a 50/50 collapse, but given they had been put through the ringer all game the ref didn't have much choice. The 2nd actually made it uncontested scrums when Edinburgh were looking for a penalty try so it actually lost them the advantage!

The 3rd yellow was the most blatant example of coming into the side of a maul that you could see - given it was 5m out of should have been a penalty try too.

The 4th was soft and a non-dangerous tip tackle, but he lifted the legs above horizontal so the precedent is there.

So really he needs to get his own house in order instead of blaming the ref!

Yep Edinburgh really are that good. All hail the recent resurgence in Scottish Rugby.  Are you Andy Nicole?

Very puzzling that you would take my comments on Dragons' yellow cards as me saying how amazing Edinburgh are.

Did you even watch the game?

If you look to the match thread me and all the other Edinburgh fans were actually disappointed with our performance. Despite dominating possession and territory and having a far superior scrum - and the fact that the opposition had 4 yellows - we only just managed to get the BP after an utterly inept attacking display. We blew 4 on 1s and looked completely clueless with the ball in hand.

Edinburgh's problem is that we have a very strong set piece but haven't got a clue what to do with the ball we win.

So stop being so touchy!

Why is someone who used to work for Cardiff Blues refereeing Cardiff Blues again this weekend?

Is there seriously no other human being to be found on planet earth (that didn't work for cardiff blues) that can officiate? It's things like this that just reduce the credibility of this competition. Imagine a Chelsea employee refereeing a Chelsea Premier League match.

Chunky Norwich wrote:Why is someone who used to work for Cardiff Blues refereeing Cardiff Blues again this weekend?

Is there seriously no other human being to be found on planet earth (that didn't work for cardiff blues) that can officiate? It's things like this that just reduce the credibility of this competition. Imagine a Chelsea employee refereeing a Chelsea Premier League match.

Nice analogy only problem is hes a FORMER employee so its not like a Chelsea employee refereeing them

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:Why is someone who used to work for Cardiff Blues refereeing Cardiff Blues again this weekend?

Is there seriously no other human being to be found on planet earth (that didn't work for cardiff blues) that can officiate? It's things like this that just reduce the credibility of this competition. Imagine a Chelsea employee refereeing a Chelsea Premier League match.

Nice analogy only problem is hes a FORMER employee so its not like a Chelsea employee refereeing them

#Defelection

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:http://m.southwalesargus.co.uk/sport/14122583.Dragons_write_to_Pro12_ref_chiefs_to_complain_about_controversial_calls/

Lyn's got it in for Mitrea. Understandably.

To be fair, 3 of the cards were justified, and although the 4th was soft an argument could be made for it being a yellow.

The Dragons scrum was completely annihilated, so 2 yellows is probably fair. The 2nd one was unexpected given that specific scrum looked more like a 50/50 collapse, but given they had been put through the ringer all game the ref didn't have much choice. The 2nd actually made it uncontested scrums when Edinburgh were looking for a penalty try so it actually lost them the advantage!

The 3rd yellow was the most blatant example of coming into the side of a maul that you could see - given it was 5m out of should have been a penalty try too.

The 4th was soft and a non-dangerous tip tackle, but he lifted the legs above horizontal so the precedent is there.

So really he needs to get his own house in order instead of blaming the ref!

In Lyn's defence (and that's not something I say very often), he isn't blaming the ref for the defeat.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:http://m.southwalesargus.co.uk/sport/14122583.Dragons_write_to_Pro12_ref_chiefs_to_complain_about_controversial_calls/

Lyn's got it in for Mitrea. Understandably.

To be fair, 3 of the cards were justified, and although the 4th was soft an argument could be made for it being a yellow.

The Dragons scrum was completely annihilated, so 2 yellows is probably fair. The 2nd one was unexpected given that specific scrum looked more like a 50/50 collapse, but given they had been put through the ringer all game the ref didn't have much choice. The 2nd actually made it uncontested scrums when Edinburgh were looking for a penalty try so it actually lost them the advantage!

The 3rd yellow was the most blatant example of coming into the side of a maul that you could see - given it was 5m out of should have been a penalty try too.

The 4th was soft and a non-dangerous tip tackle, but he lifted the legs above horizontal so the precedent is there.

So really he needs to get his own house in order instead of blaming the ref!

In Lyn's defence (and that's not something I say very often), he isn't blaming the ref for the defeat.

That's fair enough, but I don't think he can have much complaints with the yellows.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:Why is someone who used to work for Cardiff Blues refereeing Cardiff Blues again this weekend?

Is there seriously no other human being to be found on planet earth (that didn't work for cardiff blues) that can officiate? It's things like this that just reduce the credibility of this competition. Imagine a Chelsea employee refereeing a Chelsea Premier League match.

Nice analogy only problem is hes a FORMER employee so its not like a Chelsea employee refereeing them

#Defelection

Maybe you'd like to explain how a former employee is like an employee then?

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:http://m.southwalesargus.co.uk/sport/14122583.Dragons_write_to_Pro12_ref_chiefs_to_complain_about_controversial_calls/

Lyn's got it in for Mitrea. Understandably.

To be fair, 3 of the cards were justified, and although the 4th was soft an argument could be made for it being a yellow.

The Dragons scrum was completely annihilated, so 2 yellows is probably fair. The 2nd one was unexpected given that specific scrum looked more like a 50/50 collapse, but given they had been put through the ringer all game the ref didn't have much choice. The 2nd actually made it uncontested scrums when Edinburgh were looking for a penalty try so it actually lost them the advantage!

The 3rd yellow was the most blatant example of coming into the side of a maul that you could see - given it was 5m out of should have been a penalty try too.

The 4th was soft and a non-dangerous tip tackle, but he lifted the legs above horizontal so the precedent is there.

So really he needs to get his own house in order instead of blaming the ref!

In Lyn's defence (and that's not something I say very often), he isn't blaming the ref for the defeat.

That's fair enough, but I don't think he can have much complaints with the yellows.

From the quotes in the article he seems to have a problem with them blaming the involvement of four unions and differing interpretations

What happened last week is gone but we don't have many lessons to learn, let's put it that way. We are very happy with our preparation and players' discipline. We are asking them to behave in no different manner

To me that's a stubborn and foolish approach if its going to see players sin binned every game

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:Why is someone who used to work for Cardiff Blues refereeing Cardiff Blues again this weekend?

Is there seriously no other human being to be found on planet earth (that didn't work for cardiff blues) that can officiate? It's things like this that just reduce the credibility of this competition. Imagine a Chelsea employee refereeing a Chelsea Premier League match.

Nice analogy only problem is hes a FORMER employee so its not like a Chelsea employee refereeing them

#Defelection

Maybe you'd like to explain how a former employee is like an employee then?

Pitiful. Even by your standards.

marty2086 wrote:

To me that's a stubborn and foolish approach if its going to see players sin binned every game

Absolutely.

He's lost the plot of he thinks his team didn't deserve the yellows and that they don't have anything to work on.

I suppose this highlights the current problem in the game - a weak scrum is a massive issue for a team. It means a knock on in your own half - from either team - will likely lead to 3 points against you and a high risk of yellow cards.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

He's lost the plot.

He lost the plot a long time ago. He's seen a buffoon in Welsh rugby circles.

I cannot fathom how the Dragons can complain about Mitrea!! I was at the game and he absolutely rescued them from a complete and utter humbling. The yellow cards were the absolute bare minimum the Dragons deserved - the Dragons defence was offside the entire match, and the scrum was rendered a complete farce. Mitrea penalised the Edinburgh scrum at one point for an early shove, which was a classic example of Stankovich failing to front up at the engagement. That was following a "knock on" from Tonks which look for all the world to be an interception try. A 10 point turnaround. I also thought the disallowed Nel try was a try, and when the Dragons scored at the end (with a similar movement to the disallowed try from Nel), there were a bunch of calls in the build-up which looked for all the world to be Mitrea allowing a soft consolation score.

The view from the touchline was that it was one of the worst ref performances ever seen at Murrayfield, but certainly not to the detriment of the woeful Dragons.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:Why is someone who used to work for Cardiff Blues refereeing Cardiff Blues again this weekend?

Is there seriously no other human being to be found on planet earth (that didn't work for cardiff blues) that can officiate? It's things like this that just reduce the credibility of this competition. Imagine a Chelsea employee refereeing a Chelsea Premier League match.

Nice analogy only problem is hes a FORMER employee so its not like a Chelsea employee refereeing them

#Defelection

Maybe you'd like to explain how a former employee is like an employee then?

Pitiful. Even by your standards.

So theres no difference in your mind?

RDW_Scotland wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

To me that's a stubborn and foolish approach if its going to see players sin binned every game

Absolutely.

He's lost the plot of he thinks his team didn't deserve the yellows and that they don't have anything to work on.

I suppose this highlights the current problem in the game - a weak scrum is a massive issue for a team. It means a knock on in your own half - from either team - will likely lead to 3 points against you and a high risk of yellow cards.

Maybe the Nigel Owens approach is the right one, in that the scrum is a restart method rather than an opportunity to gain a penalty like in League

RDW_Scotland wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

To me that's a stubborn and foolish approach if its going to see players sin binned every game

Absolutely.

He's lost the plot of he thinks his team didn't deserve the yellows and that they don't have anything to work on.

I suppose this highlights the current problem in the game - a weak scrum is a massive issue for a team. It means a knock on in your own half - from either team - will likely lead to 3 points against you and a high risk of yellow cards.

He's always been stubborn.

marty2086 wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

To me that's a stubborn and foolish approach if its going to see players sin binned every game

Absolutely.

He's lost the plot of he thinks his team didn't deserve the yellows and that they don't have anything to work on.

I suppose this highlights the current problem in the game - a weak scrum is a massive issue for a team. It means a knock on in your own half - from either team - will likely lead to 3 points against you and a high risk of yellow cards.

Maybe the Nigel Owens approach is the right one, in that the scrum is a restart method rather than an opportunity to gain a penalty like in League

I don't think that's the Nigel Owens approach. I've seen him award plenty scrum penalties. He just seems to be the ref who best appreciates that rugby isn't a black and white game and that particularly at scrum time, multiple offences can occur at the same time, and therefore he looks at the scrum as a whole to decide whether one team is gleaning unfair advantage over the other by cheating. If both are messing about and the ball is available, he just lets the game continue. Great ref.

funnyExiledScot wrote:
I don't think that's the Nigel Owens approach. I've seen him award plenty scrum penalties. He just seems to be the ref who best appreciates that rugby isn't a black and white game and that particularly at scrum time, multiple offences can occur at the same time, and therefore he looks at the scrum as a whole to decide whether one team is gleaning unfair advantage over the other by cheating. If both are messing about and the ball is available, he just lets the game continue. Great ref.

Nigel Owens does not ref the scrum, nor does he ref the breakdown. He lets everything go to instill the spirit of the game and to keep the game flowing and not have the game stop start. He is not a great ref. He is a decent ref, and a great human being. But he does not do his job properly. Thus teams who are notorious for bending the rules/pushing the limits in the scrum and at the breakdowns are already at an advantage before a ball is kicked.

LordDowlais wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:
I don't think that's the Nigel Owens approach. I've seen him award plenty scrum penalties. He just seems to be the ref who best appreciates that rugby isn't a black and white game and that particularly at scrum time, multiple offences can occur at the same time, and therefore he looks at the scrum as a whole to decide whether one team is gleaning unfair advantage over the other by cheating. If both are messing about and the ball is available, he just lets the game continue. Great ref.

Nigel Owens does not ref the scrum, nor does he ref the breakdown. He lets everything go to instill the spirit of the game and to keep the game flowing and not have the game stop start. He is not a great ref. He is a decent ref, and a great human being. But he does not do his job properly. Thus teams who are notorious for bending the rules/pushing the limits in the scrum and at the breakdowns are already at an advantage before a ball is kicked.

True to form, another issue on which we completely disagree!!

LordDowlais wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:
I don't think that's the Nigel Owens approach. I've seen him award plenty scrum penalties. He just seems to be the ref who best appreciates that rugby isn't a black and white game and that particularly at scrum time, multiple offences can occur at the same time, and therefore he looks at the scrum as a whole to decide whether one team is gleaning unfair advantage over the other by cheating. If both are messing about and the ball is available, he just lets the game continue. Great ref.

Nigel Owens does not ref the scrum, nor does he ref the breakdown. He lets everything go to instill the spirit of the game and to keep the game flowing and not have the game stop start. He is not a great ref. He is a decent ref, and a great human being. But he does not do his job properly. Thus teams who are notorious for bending the rules/pushing the limits in the scrum and at the breakdowns are already at an advantage before a ball is kicked.

Absolutely spot on.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:
I don't think that's the Nigel Owens approach. I've seen him award plenty scrum penalties. He just seems to be the ref who best appreciates that rugby isn't a black and white game and that particularly at scrum time, multiple offences can occur at the same time, and therefore he looks at the scrum as a whole to decide whether one team is gleaning unfair advantage over the other by cheating. If both are messing about and the ball is available, he just lets the game continue. Great ref.

Nigel Owens does not ref the scrum, nor does he ref the breakdown. He lets everything go to instill the spirit of the game and to keep the game flowing and not have the game stop start. He is not a great ref. He is a decent ref, and a great human being. But he does not do his job properly. Thus teams who are notorious for bending the rules/pushing the limits in the scrum and at the breakdowns are already at an advantage before a ball is kicked.

Absolutely spot on.

I'm going to have to start counting the number of times in a game he shouts roll away, hands off or tells a player trapped in a ruck to stay

Given he's one of the best refs around is there a case for having a little think about whether too much is expected of refs?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Given he's one of the best refs around is there a case for having a little think about whether too much is expected of refs?

Owens is considered one of the best ref because he lets the game flow which makes for better viewing, not because he applies the rules correctly.

I don't think you can get away with not applying the rules correctly. I've seen mistakes, a few against England against NZ last year which may have put a different spin on the games but he's still one of the very best. I've said it before but if people are really expecting a better standard of ref than owens they'll be waiting for a helluva long time.

Owens is lenient at the breakdown and his refereeing at the scrum is almost non existent. I do like his rants at soccer though.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I don't think you can get away with not applying the rules correctly. I've seen mistakes, a few against England against NZ last year which may have put a different spin on the games but he's still one of the very best. I've said it before but if people are really expecting a better standard of ref than owens they'll be waiting for a helluva long time.

Wayne Barnes, JP Doyle, are two refs I consider better than our Nige, but at the end of the day, it is all about opinions.

And if that opinion is that he lets everything go, that's just not right.

Owens occasionally drops clangers too. But nobody ever mentions it. Like the Keith Earls non penalty try.

He even apologised after one match because he got a huge decision badly wrong. Fair play for the apology but it's a bit late then.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/16291685.app

funnyExiledScot wrote:I cannot fathom how the Dragons can complain about Mitrea!!


The view from the touchline was that it was one of the worst ref performances ever seen at Murrayfield, but certainly not to the detriment of the woeful Dragons.

So you can't fathom why a coach, even one as bone headed as Lyp, could be upset with one of the worst ref performances ever seen at Murrayfield? Calm down and try again sweetheart, you've got your knickers in in a twist there....

I am confused why Lyp didn't raise such a fuss over Dudley's performance v Ulster. I guess it's because there wasn't as many yellows, but that was a dreadful refereeing performance too.

Well with all the talk of bad refs, I thought Ian Davies had a strong game tonight for Ulster v Edinburgh

I have never been disappointed with Ian Davies in charge, very good ref and always seems to be fair.

The refs perfornance in the Connacht Cardiff game was very good aswell. Don't know his name.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:The refs perfornance in the Connacht Cardiff game was very good aswell. Don't know his name.

The post about it on Facebook is just full of Irish fans whinging about him ?

VinceWLB wrote:I have never been disappointed with Ian Davies in charge, very good ref and always seems to be fair.

I thought he missed players from both sides going into rucks from the wrong angles and how many times did he let scrums go down with the ball at the back? Apparently thats unacceptable