I think that naturally the leeds side probably did expect to totally dominate a depleted pack.walmesley and amor have been far and away the dominant pair of front rowers in the league and with them missing it looked a mismatch.full credit to the lads that filled in though,saverlio(?) looked a handful and a top prospect and I thought Flanagan got through a ton of work for you.

that said,our halves were a fair bit clueless in your 20 and very predictable.not to take anything away from saints defence which was excellent.I think you have confirmed yourselves as favorites for the title this year.

It wasn't a knock on according to Cummings because hitting his leg negates it. He was 100% sure too. So getting the super zoom out was a massive waste of time and according to him they got it badly wrong.

Definitely agreed with the last part. Ref waved play on and too much happens after that incident. According to some football journos it's why they don't want it in their sport.

Give over. It was a knock on. Every fan of every club on here was that involving their side would call it a knock on. Always has been a knock on so not sure where Cummings came up with this rule amendment.

The other point is probably correct though.

Cummings pandering to the frothing at the mouth sky team who were willing every video decision to go for saints,it was embarrassing.

Seems an odd thing to say if it wasn't the case tho? It just shows how frustrating it is that even refs and ex head of refs are going off two different set of rule books.

Morally it was a knock on all day long.

My understanding (and I can't be arrsed looking it up, but a long time ago I seem to remember doing so) is that this all relates to the kick.

If I am running with the ball then I can drop the ball in a forward motion but if I kick it before it touches the ground, that is legal and it is play on.

But if I just fumble it, and it goes to ground, it is a knock on, and it makes no difference whether it accidentally makes an incidental contact that I didn't intend with my leg on the way down.

If you look up the definitions, I think you will find that the exemption is if a player "KICKS" the ball, which means what it says on the tin. It means a conscious and successful decision to propel the ball somewhere with your leg.

On any natural meaning, or common sense, or anything else, there was never in a million years any "kick" here, the ball by fluke bounced lightly off the leg and the player knew nothing of it and intended none of it. So the accidental contact with the leg does not negate the obvious knock on.

If he'd dropped it, but then seeing it was falling to ground, deliberately had a go at it with his leg, then it would be OK. Because that would count as a "kick".

____________________________
EDIT
Oh, go on then. Just for you:

Accidental Knock on:
If, after knocking-on accidentally, the player
knocking-on .... kicks the ball before it
touches the ground,... then play shall be allowed to proceed.

Definitions:
KICK means imparting motion to the ball with any part of the
leg (except the heel) from knee to toe inclusive.

Look again; Laffranchi was half a meter offside. HTH

Did not watch it on SKY have no idea what the commentators where saying.

So makes little difference to my interpretation.

In one set of six we had a player tackled in the air. a flop, something else that escapes me now. But we got zip. We where hardly favoured by the ref last night.

As for the none - knock on. It just looked like they were trying to find any reason not to send a player from the feild. Tackling the man without the ball in the act off scoring. Is that not a sending off???

Pretty much my assessment of it.

I thought Leeds' stronger bench would show in the end (although why we had BJB as an unused sub is anyone's guess) and that St Helens would struggle with 80 minutes of pressure.

Credit to St Helens, they defended superbly and came up with some big plays at the end.

I don't understand Leaguefan's criticism of Leeds for kicking the two penalty goals. In those circumstances, I'd suggest any team would have taken the two points on offer.

Spot on Leeds have lost that killer touch.
As for the non playing of BJB, effectively playing with a 2 man bench in the second forty was bound to take its toll.
Maybe Brian Mc was attempting to battle harden the troops. If that’s the case, I think he was wrong, it’s a 17 man game these days.
Credit to Saints for finding a way at the end.

It's not directly relevant, but it's worth remembering the Danny McGuire try at Wigan in July 2011 which was disallowed after he knocked on, it bounced then he kicked it - i.e. it became effectively a drop kick. Incorrectly denying that in the last minute cost Leeds the game and generated one of Cummings' Monday morning phone calls of apology to the head coach.

On the topic of the video ref though, I find it stunning that Silverwood was able to give that last try without checking the onside at the kick through.

It was a knock on by Clarkson before Walker knocked on. He knocks the ball out of Roby's hand, clear attempt at the ball aswell. Should of been scrum feed St Helens, rather than turn over.

Don't think so.I think you'll find that Clarkson knocks Roby's wrist rather than knocks the ball on.

We had the same. We lost Walker to injury (the nose break) and we didn't see Savelio in the second half.

No chance, Watch it again. Ive watched the full game 5 times already ( i love a good win on Sky Sports ).

Sky did it in a replay and we were onside.

So have I in super zoom too!

What did that Makinson winning try look like in super zoom ? I don't have it on mine.

I think the issue was not whether it was deliberate/accidental or kick/no kick, but rather the fact that it went backwards off his leg, rather than forwards, before it touched the ground. If it had accidentally hit his leg and gone forwards, then that'd still be a knock on, nobody is debating that. But Cummins seemed pretty sure that the fact it hit his leg and went backwards meant that it wasn't a knock on.

Was savelio due to injury? With leeds it's by design not circumstance. That is where leeds fans are coming from, it's a criticism of mcdermott, he consistently has unused subs, and some subs only seem to have 10/15 minute cameos, so many games leeds barely use 16 players.

It's ridiculous.

the weather didn't help. RL is usually so much better when played on a dry track, as most know.

The sky commentators were doing saints a disservice. You'd think saints had resorted to fielding 13 grannies off the street.

In reality, yes understrength, but plenty of highly talented, highly motivated youngsters out to kick start their career, a team on a winning run, high on confidence, at home as well. It simply wasn't the easy proposition the commentators were painting. Saints away never is easy.

Due to the above, i knew before the game leeds would be in for a torrid battle, and so it proved.

If we'd have sent that team to Bradford, they would be moaning and Longy would be laying off bets.

No, you fundamentally misunderstand the rule.

That is 100% certainly what he did.

Note: the definition says NOTHING about the ball having to hit the ground, or an opponent. As soon as the ball is played forward, it has been knocked on.

What you are confusing is that a knock on does not always stop play. You CAN knock on, but then retrieve the situation, so that play continues THIS DOES NOT MEAN YOU DIDN'T KNOCK ON, but it means the knock on will not lead to play being stopped.

If you accidentally knock on, but the regather, then it WAS still a knock on, but the rules let you off, and so it is play on. If you drop the ball forwards, but then kick it before it hits the ground, that was still a knock on, but you the rules say this allows play to go on.

Most people misunderstand this rule. They think that for it to be a knock on,the ball has to hit the ground or an opponent. But this is wrong. Hitting the ground or an opponent is what will stop play. If you manage to avoid that by catching or kicking the ball, play will be allowed to continue, but it was still a knock on. Most people in conversation will say if you (for example, knock it forward but regather it), that "it wasn't a knock on". But it WAS. What they actually mean is, the knock on was cancelled out by managing to regather the ball.

Normally the distinction isn't important, but in this case it is crucial, because there are only 2 ways to negate the knock on, that would be to catch it, or kick it. He did neither. And therefore it remained a knock on which should have stopped play.

As a neutral can I just say that St. Helens thoroughly deserved their win. Leeds seemed to be lacking any real spark whereas Saints were their usual inventive selves.