Joel T should have got 10 minutes, dimwit Phil Clarke saying it wasn't a hard kick shows him to be the numpty he is.

Sam T milks the first 'hang onto the arm' penalty, but in the 2nd Sinfield doesn't seem to make much effort to get out of the way so correct decision.

Richards tackled late by Scotty but Scot already committed and Richard's had already kicked it into touch anyway! McGuire pulled back Carmont but that wasn't what the penalty was given for, so irrelevant. I doubt anyone in SL would have landed a 52 metre penalty from near the touchline in the last few seconds so Richard's shouldn't beat himself up about that.

Had Richard's kicked one of the two easier ones he missed, Wigan would have probably won.

Overall an awesome game, well worthy of a Grand Final, could have gone either way but glad Leeds won. Not sure about the merits or otherwise of a week off, but with Leeds walking wounded I suppose it can't be a bad thing?

Except it wasn't.

Please pay attention in future.

I think Bentham made the call for Alibert !

How come Buderus was put on report for a dangerous tackle but when Wigan do it to Eastwood it was only a penalty ?

Wasn't a penalty, oh ok!

Wasnt 52 metres was it you tool.

He must be adding on Richards twelve metre run up!

Funny how irony is so easily lost on some....

Danny

Measure it on the angle Pythagurus square on the hypotinus - if he was 30 meters in field and 41 metres out he had to be more than 50 metres from the posts

Maths its a great thing

It is when it's combined with average eyesight.

Of course that's what he meant.

He doesnt know the meaning of irony either. Oh dear.

From the centre it is 30 metres away - making the distance from the post easy to calculate - unless the Greek mathematician got it wrong!!

Danny doesn't do maths

Danny does sums.

square root of 30 squared plus 41 squared = approx 51 meters.

PS Here's hoping Hull KR stay in their current rich vein of form

As much as I view Saints and Bradford as traditional (and often worthy) adversaries. Our real enemies always have been and probably always will be Wigan.

Yesterday was how can I put it...bliss

You must have been supporting leeds for a long time?

On the Carmont obstruction... The Halibet allowed play on so he coudnt then award the penalty as Wigan had advanced over the gain line...

and I dont think the Donald tackle was late added to which Pat had kicked the ball into touch.

Indeed... almost as long as McF! And yes I stick by the view that Wigan are by tradition our fiercest and least loved rivals.

I am told by even older generations that after Wigan come Warrington in the traditional enemy stakes, but that must be going back to when Adam was a lad.

Frankly I have always liked StHelens - they play a brand of rugby I have always admired - and yes obviously I want us to give them a hiding whenever we play them but having said that they are always worth watching.

As for Bradford - who they

I apologise, I mis-understood your 'in field' comment and yes I now understand - 51 metres is correct as per Highbury's explanation.

He gave play on for the Donald challenge on Richards.

He hadn't seen the McGuire obstruction on Carmont so was perfectly within his rights to go back and give a penalty for that offence on the advice of the TJ/VR if he believed Wigan had not had sufficient advantage from the play (the ball going into touch 30 yards up field wasn't an advantage IMO).

Where he got it wrong was allowing himself to be talked out of his original call on the Donald incident by the TJ/VR and giving the penalty where the ball landed from Richards' kick.

I agree with your 1st comment but the latter part (underlined etc) is irrelevant.