Read the ****ing post I was responding to, ****.

When you have to resort to stating the bleedin obvious mate its time to stop digging the huge hole your fast disappearing into

Mick Withers "knock on".

Indeed.

Feck the offside, which it was IMO. I was more peeved with Meli once again making the mistake that led to the opportunity.

FACT: If you make mistakes, then you put yourself in the position to suffer these calls.

Leeds made the most of the Saints errors. Meli's howlers and Fas' ill advised pass before half time.

Spot on. You can add to this the fact that both of the Saints penalties were from decisions that were at best harsh (Senior's obstruction and Burrow's high tackle). So they arguably 'cheated' all 10 points. Should have been 18-0 !

Clarke (acting as a front for a dispasionate stat man) allows himself to get too emotuionally involved. I referenced the Eastmond try myself and Clarke's bizarre utterance that it should be awarded just on the basis that Eastmond is the most exciting young prospect on the field.

Where does that enter the legallity of the score.

Both were close calls, both were correctly awarded as tries.

All the Saints fans? Have you spoken to them all?

24-0, since Webb was just going for the ball and shouldn't have been penalised when Bailey 'scored'.

Saints should have had a penalty when Webb failed to play the ball correctly and Ganson gave a knock on. 24-2

Of course Leon knows there was a game. He got a much better view than all the other spectators at Old Trafford.

With the Saints player all over his back has he tried to play the ball it should have been a penalty to Leeds and we would have gone the length of the field to score..... 30-0

Saints player was stood up Webb played the ball before regaining his feet.

Even Phil Bentham would've spotted it.

linkage?

And MR Cumming's and the R.F.L. have alway's been correct in what they say and do.........Give me strength I can live with leeds winning the game but let's get off this "OFFICIAL" clarification confirmation of the try sorted.
It was a wrong decision that went against the saint's. It wasnt 50/50 60/40 or 70/30 decision.They got it 100% wrong end of.


Shall we go back to the start of the build up to the try were the leeds player kicked the ball forward at the play the ball and the touch judge was looking at it. NAH a bit like union, if it looks like a nice try ..........leave it alone.


Look forward to headingley next year

What's it got to do with a glory hunter whose glory hunting has backfired spectacularly?

i thought it offside at the time and still think it was.however i still have doubts over eastmonds try too...........................

Eastmond's try is just as contentious, if not more so.

You 100% num-nuck of course they are correct idiot.



of course they have the final say they are the ruling bodies...God give me strength your nearly as daft as the Cas fans these days.

I had as big a grin after Saturday's VR decision for Smith as I did when the VR gave his decision for the Leon Pryce 'try' a few years ago

Ladies and gentlemen we have a definitive opinion here. No need for further discussion. If any proof were needed Smith were off side then the posters use of the words "end of" is it.

The issue can be left now.

I thought it had to be fact...............sorry FACT to be true. Is "end of" the new FACT?

It was funny how on commentary Clarke said - "so, this is no try Eddie, we now have 7 minutes remaining with a saints penalty which should get them up to half way, what a finish to the game"

10 seconds later bentham rolled on the film - I was laughing my head off.

By the way - did anyone else buy one of the headsets? Quality for listening to why things were happening when its sometimes hard to understand at the game.

No coz it is FACT



No wink = no FACT.

Got mine at Murrayfield earlier this year, brilliant little doofrey. Thaler was hilarious at Murrayfield with plenty of banter with the players. Certainly helped out on saturday too.