As with all big games, the team that gets the bounce of the ball (rub of the green, 50/50's, call em whatever you like) usually get the win. Just as we did in the semi. Hope Wire can back it up with a GF win, anyone but Wigan! Just can't see us doing it from 5th this year somehow

suppose if you shout at it loud enough you will give it a roasting

I'm yet to see both the briers knock on or the no try incidents back on the tv so can only go off what I could see at the game so i may be wrong. The briers incident coming so soon after the no try was critical and iirc Warrington scored off the next two sets following the knock on. I'll have a look today but I didn't see a knock on from Kylie and briers did appear to knock on. Having said that though you have to ride above decisions you feel went against you and there's no excuse for a supposed champion side letting their heads drop.

My Leeds mate who was just behind us said 'Just so long as Briers doesn't get the Lance Todd!'

Spot on, except I thought the no try was correct. Kylie touched the ball & once he did Delaney who was in front had to be judged offside, regardless of whether you would would class it as a knock on or not.

Are we all sure of the knock-on rule on here???....I think, and I stress that its I think, its where the ball lands and not where a ball rolls off to, that is the key point.

With this in mind, it isn't a knock-on, simple as.....The ball lands about 2 foot behind where Briers originally fields the ball and then it rolls forward about 6 foot.

We probably need a quick review of the rulebook to sort this out, then we can all stop quibbling....

Therefore the Wire player who picked it up was offside!

Agree to a certain extent. It is the trajectory the ball takes from Briers that is the issue. The BBC post match demonstrated the ball went straight up and then floated backwards, hit the ground, and rolled forward. Technically correct decision to play on......BUT how many times do you see a player lose the ball sideways and its given because when it hits the ground it rolls forward. Infact, Leeds got the scrum for a "first offence" knock on for the (correctly) ruled out try BUT, did Hodgson actually lose it forwards.

In relation to the Briers incident I can see why it was called back BUT its one of those if it wasnt given you could see why. In slow-mo, yep, penalty. I think if Briers had just stood still then he might have got the call BUT he planted himself prepared to be hit by Hall.

Some bad calls in all directs yesterday so I dont think the outcome would have been different.

Didn't the collecting Wire player come from behind briers though ?

Take off your blue and amber specs.

The BBC reviewed the incident at the end of the game with super-imposed lines through where Briers played the ball and where it landed.

It went backwards by a good 2 or 3 feet, then bounced forwards, to be in front of Briers. That is not a knock on.

The player then taking the ball came from behind Briers, so not offside either.

It's a shame, but Leeds were nowhere near good enough on the day and trying to hang the defeat on 2 incidents (the no-try), is a bit embarrassing really.

The 'standing still' rule only applies if they are stood still at the time of the the kick - ie chip & chase. Running into a position to stand still is a different matter. There's also a rule that you must make an attempt to challenge for the ball in a high kick. Correct decision either way

It wasn't just obstruction though, Briers deliberately lent into Hall, while Hall was in mid air challenging for the ball. That's a tackle in the air, i.e. a dangerous tackle, and is not only a penalty to Leeds but a yellow card to Briers.

Similarly, Wood punching Ablett with 20 mins gone. The rules very clearly state that striking is a red card.

Oh, yeah, and Briers knocked on.

I think playing 60 minutes with 12 men, and 10 minutes with 11 men, might have swung the game away from Warrington.

Every tackle in the air is not a yellow card. And for it to be a tackle in the air he would have to attempt to tackle him. It was a clear penalty for obstruction and nothing more.

As for sending someone off for throwing a punch. We either do this all the time or not at all. As it clearly hasn't happened up until now Silverwood looks silly if he sends him off there. I'd quite like to see a rule brought in where anyone who throws punches is sin binned to bring a bit of consistency.

You sound a bit desperate here though!

Radford on Bailey, Bailey & O'Donnell on each other....it's simple, either it happens or it doesn't. As far as I'm concerned, a punch is a deliberate attempt to injure another player so they cannot continue playing. It doesn't happen accidentally, or in 'the heat of the moment' and should be a straight red card.

....The words 'straws' and 'clutching at' spring to mind here...



For the last time - BRIERS DID NOT KNOCK ON!!!

Close call but Briers moves into Halls path = penalty
The ball bounced back and went 2 yards forward. I thought that is a knock on and I have seen those given but maybe the rules say no knock on.
I think early in the game a Wire player dropped the ball sideways and it was pulled as a knoock on.
My initial reaction with Delaneys no try was a knock on by Kylie.
But looking at it again I don`t think he played at the ball and a try could have been given.
Who knows what might have been. But Leeds with the momentum might have won.
Wire got the decisions and consequently the momentum and made it count.
We were nowhere near as good as we should have been and Wire fully deserved the win.
As for Briers he took some stick from the Leeds fans including me and made light of it with a bit of banter.
Class player who ran the show. Well done Wire and Briers would love him in my team.

Burrow on Luaki, Burrow on Thackray, Peacock on Perry...I could go on all day.

You want all these incidents to be red cards?

Really???

Even if Kylie wasn't adjudged to have knocked on, Delaney was in front and therefore offside.

For all the years of playing in average sides and being loyal, it pains me to say it, but Briers probably deserves some of this success.

for me, Sinfield or the coach deciding to take the two points just before half time was the difference - Wires were on the back foot and Leeds should have gone for the six - the psychological momentum was lost from then on IMO

I appear to be one of the few Leeds fans who quite clearly saw that the Briers 'knock-on' went backwards, and that Leuluai knocked on for the 'no try' decision. I couldn't understand the outrage at the ground and I can't understand it now.

in your opinion. doesn't automatically make you right

Who knows the actual rules regarding knock ons - I don't think the referees do as a whole or at least interpret every instance with consistency. This year we have had a pass to Hall touched forward in flight at Castleford that went to the video ref (IIRC Silverwood) who gave the try but before the month was out a similar looking incident at St Helens where video ref (Smith) ruled out a try to Watkins and only last weekend Keinhorst got a touch on a pass to Hall where as in the first example the try stood - although I don't think the video ref got involved in that call. In each case the ball appeared to continue travelling backwards but at the same time it went forwards from the intervening touch.

__________

Briers appeared to clearly knock on when the scores were tied at 6 - 6 during the deluge but as no-one seems interested in that one I'll say no more about it.

The Briers one in the second half from the drop-out, on first viewing I thought 'that's a knock on' and referees usually give them as such. On second viewing I thought 'no, it went backwards from Briers' (the bounce forward after hitting the ground and finishing in front of Briers is irrelevant in that situation) but thinking about it again this morning I can also see the ball travelling forwards from the point of Briers touch before the momentum of the ball in the direction it was travelling from the kick overrides that force.

If I want to see it as a knock on I can but if I didn't I'd have little difficulty in taking the opposite view. Gawd help the impartial match officials coming to an instant decision (without in this instance the benefit of freeze-frame technology) that is more or less guaranteed to annoy one side or the other.

i saw the first one. blatant knock on ignored by the officials

Are you her 'toy boy' ?

That's more or less how I see it. I was trying not to open up the "momemtum can of worms" but now you've said it I'll make comment. For me the ball hits Briers and even though it lands slightly behind him he clearly impacted the ball in a forwards direction. Whether this is allowed for in the laws of the game I doubt. I think most people would have expected a knock on to be given in that situation, including Warrington players and fans.