Classic Gale brain fart that. What was he thinking?

And you are not allowed to dislodge the ball with the knee which they did against Walker.
Like I said previously its straw clutching but at least 2 should not have counted and Agar could be the coach we`ve been looking for!!

Doesn't really matter now but if a knee dislodges the ball, how is that different to a shoulder, say?
Providing of course that the knee hits ball and not player.

Because you cant tackle a player on the floor leading with the knees

Agar saying he sensed what was about to happen after the team left the changing rooms for the 2nd half is a concern at only 1 score down. A large part of his role is to motivate and build confidence. I really don't know what that quote from Agar says about the players or him.

Was thinking about that, been trying to see a different interpretation than what it sounds like, because what it sounds like isnt a good look.
I would 100% put it on the players myself, they shouldnt need motivating in that situation, 2nd game of the season, big match, unlucky to be 6 points down....Id be looking for the coaches to offer some technical input, but at the bare minimum id expect the players to be absolutely raring to go through there own motivation.

If what Agar is saying is some players lacked motivation. Then I would have given them 10 minutes to see how they performed and if the player(s) hadn`t got stuck in I would have subbed them.
What we don`t want is a lack of team spirit.
Makes you wonder if the player in question was Sezer taking into account what Wilkin said and how he played.
Bit worrying after the same thing happened with Luke Gale!!

I`m really speculating now (good to see Ant and Dec back on our screens).
Maybe 2 pretty decent half backs don`t buy into Agars coaching.
Just a thought.

We’re well into the realms of vastly overthinking things i think.

Just think we were too beaten up after last week to win this one. Some poor coaching decisions by sound of it, but we’d still have lost.

It`s only cos I`m bored mate.

Watching highlights, Thought video ref calls were correct, unfortunately for us…..

Even the bibby kick one?

Yeah, because it became in essence a kick . Bit like the famous Maggsy one in 2015 GF where everyone in stadium thought he’d dropped it.

You can’t kick with the heel

You can. Any part of the foot is deemed a kick. If a player intentionally heeled a ball , it would be play on, as long as it didn’t touch the floor. The video ref will know the rules in that regard, no matter what some sky pundits were saying…..

Edited (not deleted) as indeed you are correct ‘not the heel’
Wrong call then. But unless…….
Ball went backwards of his hand (which it did) then hit the heel and propelled forwards. Not a knock on as off the heel. So still play on and a try. (Don’t think they used this logic though, but still think decision correct)

????????

Find us the rule that you can kick it with your heel


Clearly backwards of his arm onto his foot.

Think it’s obvious to 99.9% if people that was a try (albeit one of the luckiest ones in history)

The ref and VR didn't cause that try, it was Leeds players all standing still waiting for the whistle that was the problem. The highlights showed a lot of bad defence involved in Wigan's tries - offloads that should have been stopped, slow reactions to events and just bad misses.

It was a try. Move on. You looked good, we were depleted. Let’s see if we can catch you l8r in season…..

It was 100% the leeds players fault that try was scored.

Every play the ball is supposed to rolled back with the foot or heel. Hookers are supposed to heel the ball back in scrums. Lewis Jones used to back heel over touchline conversions (allegedly). Yet Chris reckons all those would be illegal. Lol.

It was a try and we shouldve played to the whistle.

Both the on field ref and VR thought it was a knock on.

The reason the VR gave the try was that the knock on was negated by bibby kicking the ball. Sounds fair right? It does until you read the definition of s kick in the laws of RL

“ Kick means imparting motion to the ball with any part of the leg (except the heel) from the knee to toe inclusive.”

Its not the reason leeds lost, the fact that leeds stood there and watch Field just pick the ball up was schoolboy stuff.

But it shouldn’t have been given.

It’s not me who reckons, its in the laws of the game.

Was dropped backwards to hit his heel so not a knock on. Look up definition of Knock on, has to go forwards off the hand.

You’re missing my point, both the ref and the VR thought it was s knock on and the VR thought the kick negated it.

Personally I’m not sure if it was a knock in or not, but can you honestly say if it hadn’t hit his heel that wouldn’t have been given as s knock on?