Thats a good point. The decision for Eastmond's no-try was given for hitting the corner flag. From the stands it looked like his feet were in touch twice.

As a matter of interest, which "step" did you think was out?

The first one on the replay, showed grass between the line and his foot.

The second one showed that although the back of his foot was over the line, this part of his foot was off the ground.

I never saw grass between on the first one although I think he was not out.

IMO it was not given for hitting the flag.

Yep, that's what I saw!

Couldn't tell initially from where I was sat. When they showed the big screen replay I thought his foot grazed the touchline once, maybe twice but I had the horrible feeling that it was that close he might have been given the benefit of doubt. However, it became academic once they showed the contact with the corner flag - indeed most of both his legs were in touch by the time the ball hit the ground.

Re Smith's try, I thought it was offside. Having since seen the replays I'm not sure. Either way, I haven't seen many attacking sides benefit from such a marginal video call before (at least not for an onside/offside decision).

Yes - that was my earlier point. If he'd grounded it, it would have been given. Therefore the Eastmond foot on line would have been just as close as the Lee Smith call IMO.

Clearly the stills show that Lee Smith was well onside. Wally was offside, but made no move towards the ball or an opponent, so the try was rightly given.

I can spot Wally, but where's Leon Pryce?

I thought they were one and the same?

Hence it was a 20 metre restart as the corner flag is touch in goal.

If the try had been disallowed for being in touch, it would have been a scrum defence instead.

Why not, It's a very very tight line between the ball and Smith with no conclusive evidence either way, therefore it's a 50/50 that went to the attacking team, It's not like the ridiculous MM try, please tell us or show us why it should not have been given.

It appears we are.



Can you see at anytime where Mcguire has the ball in hand and Smith is in front of the ball?



I'm sure he's devastated to hear that news.

I've already expressed my understanding of the try both in the ground, and then later on TV, however the second time we watched it on TV we didn't listen to the clowns in the TV studio who base their opinions on whatever it is they are plugging that week, they are like used car salesmen trying desperately to get rid of this weeks lemon off the forecourt, they'll say anything to get you to believe them.

Who gives a monkey's nut anyway – we can spend from now while Celtic win their first GF debating this point but it aint gunna remove the name engraved on that oversized vase.

this ain't perfect



but its where Bentham stopped it to judge

and the red line is close to being in perspective, closer than the other one anyway

and smiths one foot on the floor is behind the ball

so he got the decision right

the only surprise for me is he found a reason to give the try when the video ref will usually look for evidence to disallow

on the body language of everyone on the field, without a video the try is given anyway in my opinion

Wally is clearly a Wigan player in that photo so could not have been offside anyway, although what he was doing on the pitch in the first place is another question - can you zoom in a bit, is it Phil Clarke in one of his old kits ?

Here's a thought.

If you run the footage on from that point, do any of the Leeds players around where the play the ball was encroach within ten metres before Lee Smith collects the ball?



Also, Brent Webb was ahead of the play the ball and making no effort to get back onside for Smith's first try so that should have been disallowed as well.

I thought both were, but I was in the East stand 100m away. On the replays it is a marginal descision for the first, correct descision for the second.

Only the first step appeared to touch the line when viewed from behind Eastmond the other two angles used were inconclusive (one was blurred anyway on freeze frame) but there appeared evidence enough there to say he was in touch but Bentham played on and Leeds needed Sinfield and the corner flag to save the try.



In both instances were they interfering in play and would that make a difference?

You either listen to the REF ONLY or you can switch to the SKY commentary, but not both at the same time. Also you cant hear when they go down to Bill, Barrie or Terry.

Just watched it again. No interference or move towards the ball from any of the Leeds players.

Most of the Saints players just stood and watched as well. James Graham was the worst culprit near the post. He was just on a stroll and watched Smith go straight past him and watched him touch down with his hands on his hips.

he does, it's amazing Smith virtually runs at Graham who makes no attempt at anything, granted it would be tricky to hold someone up from that point, but his inactivity suprised me when i noticed it.

He was probably shattered from all those wonderful metres he'd piled up in the stats over the course of the season, because that is what's important you know.

To be fair to Graham it only appears that way when filmed side on. No way he could've got near IMO.