Eh? It was Bailey who flopped on to the back of Sam Tomkins, and then stood up and tried to kick off. Webb scragged Tomkins back by the collar as though he was somehow to blame and he literally hadn't lifted a finger. It was simply frustration boiling over in the Leeds side.


Wow, you're actually trying to justify kicking off because Sam tried to run the clock down, which is perfectly legitimate. If that winds them up so much that they need to start a fight then they probably need some sort of counselling. And which amateur club did you play for that encouraged knocking a player's teeth out??? What a nice guy you sound eh? This moral high ground you were talking about...


Watch it again, he makes the tackle and gets straight back up, no "unnecessary aggressiveness". The fact that you have tried to excuse 3 separate incidents in which Leeds players lost their composure and resorted to violence is absolutely pathetic. Do you actually think it's ok just because a player acted--in your opinion--childishly? There were many incidents of childishness from Leeds players yesterday, such as patting Wigan players on the head and laughing when they'd knocked on or made a mistake, and the more serious of Ryan Bailey barging into Josh Charnley in the in-goal area whilst Leeds were celebrating a try which are far better examples of trying to goad players into losing their cool. Grow up and stop trying to defend them. Moral high ground indeed.

Oh and by the way, I was actually thinking of Kylie Leuluai cowardly running in and putting the elbow into Limas back for which he got penalised. So I guess that's 4.

I think the term the RFL use is "reckless"

Got any more video evidence for us to look at to back up your ridiculous posts ?

That was supposed to be a stamp?!

Anyway, why is he still clinging to his leg?!

Electric Gliding Warrior - you really are embarrassing yourself very badly like a very blinkered section of Wigan fans. According to you every incident Wigan players are completely blameless and innocent. You really are incredibly pathetic. Try growing up yourself and actually take a look at the incidents without your cherry & white, Phil Clarke sponsored blinkers on. Tomkins was not "winding the clock down" that's utter bullsh[ii[/it that only the most blinkered of Wigan & Tomkins apologists would subscribe to. He was looking straight at the Leeds players as he deliberately stopped in his in goal and then jogged slowly away from them. That is incredibly childish and something that doesn't even happen in junior games. As for your comment about the amateur game well it just shows how stupid you really are if you can't actually read what I posted.

I mentioned your 2 options in my previous post and which I suspected you would take. Thanks for proving me correct. Now go back to wasting your time producing video that disproves your own argument.

In these particular incidents they are. For example, in the first case Sam Tomkins collected a Leeds knock-on and Bentham blew for half-time, then Ryan Bailey came in late and dropped on Sam. The only person at fault there was Bailey, yet you said it was "caused by an unnecessary flop onto a Leeds player obviously succumbing to the tackle to end the half". Either you're hugely mistaken and are talking about a different incident or you're the most biased and blinkered person I've ever come across, to the point where you have rewritten the game to maintain your image of saintly Leeds players.


My point was that it isn't justification for a fight. And just because you believe it was childish doesn't mean everyone has to agree with you. There were about 30 seconds left on the clock and he was, imo, trying to waste as many as he could. You might not like that, and the Leeds players certainly didn't, but he hasn't actually done anything wrong. But even if you are right and he was goading them, reacting to it with violence is still wrong. Surely you can agree with that?! And as I already mentioned, McGuire and Bailey to name just 2 did a lot of goading themselves throughout the game.


You said if he'd done that in the amateur game he'd still be collecting his teeth. What have I misinterpreted?


Ah, so if I don't about turn and agree with you it's because I have a cultist approach to Wigan? Come on! You've spent the last few posts trying to deny that Leeds have any culpability for trying to start fights!

I think the term the RFL use is " "

How embarrassing for you.

For one second there I thought you were about to post some irefutable evidence of Delaney deliberatley stamping on Carmonts head.

Ha ha, there's none better than Leeds fans at denying the very reality that's in front of them.

How embarrassing for you.

Just out of curiosity, does Tomkins look offside while chasing down "that kick" that lead to the scrum? (also I know I named it "offisde" stupid typo) i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffisde.png

Just out of curiosity, does Tomkins look offside while chasing down "that kick" that lead to the scrum? (also I know I named it "offisde" stupid typo) i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffisde.png

Nobody seems to realise this. If they're going to say, "ref did this, ref did that" it really is swings and roundabouts. It lead to try and should have been a Wigan penalty in the final third.
As for the forward pass, yes it was forward and should have been chalked off.
As for the 40/20, did Charnley play for it? Did Burrows play for it? If nobody played for it then it's a 40/20.
The best way fans can go about a loss like that, is to sit back and support the actual game and say well played, unlucky.

Two days latter and you're still belly-aching ...... don't you Yorkshire men go on.

Mind you your Tetley's is okay ... just having another pint as I watch another replay of the final. By the way no one seems to mention the forward pass to Ryan Hall for his second try!

Unless it's Smoothflow it aint from Yorkshire any more.

news travels slow to Hicksville its not brewed in Leeds anymore

The Finch 40/20 attempt was absolutely right IMO. Burrow made a play at the ball in an attempt to stop Charnley kicking through and scoring. Charnley did not attempt to play ther ball after it hit Burrow hence Wigan ball. An excellent decision by the officials at full speed and another example of how people are quick to blame the officials when it suits. The officials do not get the credit they deserve on many occasions.

On the day I thought it was a wrong call but after further analysis in the comfort of my armchair I now realise that the officials got it absolutely right. So given that this was the only incident that was controversial one can only conclude that the officials had a good game overall.

Yes but Tomkins who was offside (see link, he is 2nd in from touch, and at that pointFinch hasnt even kicked the ball so he would have been even more offside) encroached on the 10 in the chase, so the whole who it came off is irrelevant i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffisde.png

Yes but Tomkins who was offside (see link, he is 2nd in from touch, and at that pointFinch hasnt even kicked the ball so he would have been even more offside) encroached on the 10 in the chase, so the whole who it came off is irrelevant i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffisde.png

Quote ="deginner"Yes but Tomkins who was offside (see link, he is 2nd in from touch, and at that pointFinch hasnt even kicked the ball so he would have been even more offside) encroached on the 10 in the chase, so the whole who it came off is irrelevant i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffisde.png'" Tomkins was not in play. It is Charnley we are talking about and he was not offside as your photo clearly shows. So it is very relevant who it came off and the officials got it absolutely right.

Quote ="deginner"Yes but Tomkins who was offside (see link, he is 2nd in from touch, and at that pointFinch hasnt even kicked the ball so he would have been even more offside) encroached on the 10 in the chase, so the whole who it came off is irrelevant i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffisde.png'" Tomkins was not in play. It is Charnley we are talking about and he was not offside as your photo clearly shows. So it is very relevant who it came off and the officials got it absolutely right.

If Charnley wasnt making a play at the ball, he wouldnt have been in position to touch the ball.

The ball went into touch about 3-5 yards before the 20yd line anyway. So if no-one had touched it, it would have been Leeds head and feed.

Agreed but that is purely hypothetical because Burrow did touch it when he made a play for it, hence Wigan's scrum.

Quote ="nohalfbacks"Tomkins was not in play. It is Charnley we are talking about and he was not offside as your photo clearly shows. So it is very relevant who it came off and the officials got it absolutely right.'" Joel Tomkins, the person to the left of Charnley is not infont of the kicker in that photo? Really? And he was in play as the rules state he has to give 10 yards Look here he is within the 10 i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffside.png And just incase you think he might not be offside because of the camera angle, you can see Joels feet are pretty much on the back of "0" of the 30, so if we draw a line from that 30 to other 30 it will give us a line the kicker would need to be infront i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... fside1.png

Quote ="nohalfbacks"Tomkins was not in play. It is Charnley we are talking about and he was not offside as your photo clearly shows. So it is very relevant who it came off and the officials got it absolutely right.'" Joel Tomkins, the person to the left of Charnley is not infont of the kicker in that photo? Really? And he was in play as the rules state he has to give 10 yards Look here he is within the 10 i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffside.png And just incase you think he might not be offside because of the camera angle, you can see Joels feet are pretty much on the back of "0" of the 30, so if we draw a line from that 30 to other 30 it will give us a line the kicker would need to be infront i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... fside1.png

The ball hit him off Burrow but he clearly wasn't trying to play at the ball at that point. He is clearly trying to avoid contact. Hence the officials got it spot on. Well done to them for a split second decision.

still got the offside wrong, see above

Quote ="deginner"Joel Tomkins, the person to the left of Charnley is not infont of the kicker in that photo? Really? And he was in play as the rules state he has to give 10 yards Look here he is within the 10 i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffside.png And just incase you think he might not be offside because of the camera angle, you can see Joels feet are pretty much on the back of "0" of the 30, so if we draw a line from that 30 to other 30 it will give us a line the kicker would need to be infront i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... fside1.png'" I didn't say Tompkins was not in front of the kicker but he is not involved in the Charnley/Burrow challenge for the ball. That doesn't make him offside as he wasn't an active player. You are clutching at straws. The ref got it absolutely correct.

Quote ="deginner"Joel Tomkins, the person to the left of Charnley is not infont of the kicker in that photo? Really? And he was in play as the rules state he has to give 10 yards Look here he is within the 10 i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... ffside.png And just incase you think he might not be offside because of the camera angle, you can see Joels feet are pretty much on the back of "0" of the 30, so if we draw a line from that 30 to other 30 it will give us a line the kicker would need to be infront i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x43 ... fside1.png'" I didn't say Tompkins was not in front of the kicker but he is not involved in the Charnley/Burrow challenge for the ball. That doesn't make him offside as he wasn't an active player. You are clutching at straws. The ref got it absolutely correct.