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.

I think you will find it does make him offside, the rules clearly state he can not be within 10 from the player getting the ball (Burrow in this case), copy and pasted from the rugby laws on the RFL website

"An off side player shall not take any part in the game
or attempt in any way to influence the course of the
game. He shall not encroach within ten metres of an
opponent who is waiting for the ball...."

Yeah true I didn't understand why that wasn't given

The Wigan fans that have said Rob Burrow made a play at the ball need to take off their cherry and white tinted specs and watch it again, Burrow doesn't make any play at the ball, he looks like he slipped or lost his balance when CHARNLEY made an attempt to kick the ball which he missed then the ball accidentally brushes off Burrow's legs while he is on the ground and onto Charnley.

Charnley was the only one to make a play at the ball with his attmpted kick, he then becomes live in that play having tried to play the ball, the ball goes off him last a "Live" player in that play so in my opinion it should be a Leeds ball at the scrum as Burrow made no play at the ball.

Regardless of it going off Burrow accidentally he makes no play at the ball, it wasn't a 40/20 so it should be Leeds ball on that basis alone even though Charnley played at the ball and it came off him last.

He was not encroaching on a player waiting for the ball. He presence had no bearing whatsover on Burrow's play at the ball whereas Josh Charnley did and he was not offside as shown clearly in your photo.

We can continue to argue the techicalities and the rights and wrongs of officialdom...or we can accept it's game over and move on: I'm doing the latter.

If it was a hugely - not marginal - forward pass for Lima's second try (and it was) and it had indeed been a travesty Wigan were awarded the scrum for Llualai's try (and it was) you could argue equally Wigan might have done something different to [ustill[/u win the game at some other point in the match. Leeds blew it really in the first twenty mins....if we hadn't been so far behind the team might not have 'pushed' its successful offload game; if BJB had scored that try Wigan might have responded three-fold. We'll simply never know.

I'm now hoping Leeds will carry on their Wigan opposition form and perform well in the play offs.