Of course! I was confused as the defenders scored and were close to the line! It all makes sense now.

I'm really hoping Armstrong left a death bed note telling the world it was all a cold war scam and they never got further than Universal studios!

Because if they are facing their own goal line and they ' drag ' the ball along the ground they are moving the ball ' forwards ' , therefore knocking on, technically a drop goal is a knock on, remember the Danny McGuire incident a ouple of years back, he had his arm pulled back, dropped the ball as a result and attempted to kick it forwards, but the ball hit the ground before he made contact , some idiots on here were suggesting he was attempting to drop kick the ball forwards

The reason why there is no doubt about the Hodgson, Lieulueai

incident is that Hodgson made an attempt to re gather the ball before it hit the ground, the Leeds player reacted to that and did move the ball forwards deliberatly

It's really not that difficult to work out. It's been explained pretty WH on the post before yours.

they will probably take the moonwalk honour away from him too just like they stripped him of the Tour de France victories ?

victimisation IMO

Dragging the ball, whilst under control?

Technically, sliding over the try line in wet conditions...........

I think we are all getting carried away with this. This issue is that 999 times out of a thousand a knock on would have been called and no one would have questioned it. That the officials choose a showpiece event to call play on gives the perception of incompetence.

Technically sliding over the line is still part of the movement of carrying the ball, whereas grabbing at a ball on the ground isnt , irrelivant in this case, it was a knock on

It is not a knock on when a tackled player loses possession of the ball. This is a separate rule which applies to any loss of possession by a tackled player:

Briers changes the direction of the ball, doesn't take it cleanly. The ball would have continued travelling past him, in stead it stopped dead and hit the ground. That's a knock on. We know it's a knock on, because that's what was given against Rob Burrow in the game against Wire last year, where the ball continued to travel backwards until Burrow picked it up clean.

Leuluai doesn't deliberately play the ball, he completes a tackle, and brushes a ball lost by Hodgson. Delaney is part of that tackle, and so is onside to play the ball, which he does, and scores. It's a legit try, and should have been given.

There's also at least one incident of 'running through the line' by Wire dummy runners, for which we've seen tries chalked off this year, and Waterhouse clears Sinfield out for another of Warrington's tries.

Meanwhile Briers deliberately makes contact with an airborne player (i.e. a dangerous tackle) and isn't binned, while Paul Wood is seen striking, and not (as should be the case) red carded.

An altogether woeful and one-eyed display from Silverwood, surely he's got to be sacked after being so e for so long.

As for some of the other 'I know the rules' special ones on here, McGuire's try at Wigan should have stood, as Cummins confirmed in the report for the weekend. There is no rule against dropkicking in open play, or that dropkicks must only be for goal (that's why missed drop goals are play on/20 metre restart it the ball goes dead).

Leeds throw between 10 and 20 forward passes a game, so dont start moaning about other clubs getting away with the odd infringement, they also employ Ryan Bailey, reason enough to be penalised, not to mention Brent Webb, and Danny Buderus , who was unable to get up off the floor without leaning all over the opposition player as he played the ball

Danny knocked on and kicked at the ball

You lost fair and square, get over it

Delaney had dropped off the tackle. So even if being in the tackle did make him onside (it doesn't) that wouldn't apply.
He was clearly in front of Leuluai when the ball touched Leuluai. He was offside. Whether Leuluai knocked on or didn't knock on the correct decision was always going to be a scrum to Leeds.

Nope. it is only a knock on if he propels it towards the opponents' lien., He didn't.. People have published phtographic proof, so you really need to accept the fact that it was a good and correct call. Continuing to pis$ into the wind is never a good idea.


It looked to me as if he was clearly trying to get the loose ball. If he wasn't. then it is a strange co-inicidence why he started to move his hand exactly in the direction the ball happened to be, wouldn't you say?


He got the gig as he's been the best ref to date. He had an excellent game. The two major decisions, one wa sprobably by a TJ (but correct) and the other was not even by him, it was (correctly ) given by the VR. How do you not know this?

You seriously need to get over it. But ridiculous hyperbole never helped a case in the recorded history of cases.

Hodgson was attempting to regain control, Leuluai made a concious attempt to prevent him doing so, result Knock on

Talking of one eyed, you should change your name to Cyclopes. As has already been pointed out, Leeds appear to be exempt from the forward pass rule. You also forget the multitude of soft penalties Leeds were awarded in the first 15 minutes but did nowt with.

Someone else states some bumf about the photographic evidence. Is that the series of three pictures where Lee briers is behind the ball on the second



It was a knock on, the officials got it wrong

As Briers' position has precisely zero relevance to the question of whether or not he knocked it on, the question is irrelevant.

As the images conclusively prove he did not knock on, i conclude you're just on the wind up.

Agree, watched over and over, its a knock on

No, its the video evidence that clearly shows Briers deflected the ball about 2 foot behind him....



It wasn't a knock on, the officials got it right.

No it's not. You can't just make up what the rule is to make you right.
A knock on is if the ball is dropped towards the opponents try line and hits either the floor or a player.


Leuluai knocks on clearly. He's moving his arms to get to the ball. He didn't do it making the tackle so it's a knock on.
Delaney is in front of Leuluai when he knocks it. He's offside. It really is that simple.


I remember seeing an incident where a Leeds player's path is slightly obstructed by a dummy runner. For it to be a penalty, the ref needs to believe that the player could have made the tackle. Had the player not stopped and whined at the ref, he'd have gotten to the player. Not the first time a Leeds player has been guilty of the whinging trait this year.


Not sure about the Briers incident, but if Wood had been sent off it would have completely ruined the game. It's a final, it's gonna get a bit spicy. I'm not sure what happened in the build up to it to cause Wood to lash out either.


Oh behave. Your team didn't lose did they?


This is one thing I disagree with Cummins about. It opens up a huge can of worms him saying that. McGuire wasn't going for a drop kick. He dropped the ball and miskicked it. That's a knock on to me. Basically Cummins is saying that it's OK to knock on as long as you kick it after, which I think goes against what the game is about. But that says it all about Cummins.

i think leeds got their fair share of dodgy calls ie the leeds player being taken into touch as silverwood shouted held at the same time he hit touch leeds got the penalty.

briers was stationary when "the obstruction" took place, he was going for the ball it went over his head so what is he meant to do dive on to the floor?

the ratchford try that didnt go to the video westwood knocks it backwards given as a scrum to leeds.

this is all being pedantic but the delany try in my opinion was correct call (of course on the day sat in the stands i was furious that it wasn't a high shot. but proved wrong when i watched it back)

briers was 50/50 again on the day i said we were lucky to get away with it but watching it back i think he gave benefit of the doubt

Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story, especially when Odem and the Electric Gliding Warrior are involved.

The image does nothing of the sort, I therefore conclude you should have gone to spec savers.

Briers, in a standing position, attempts to catch the drop out. As he is in a standing position and therefore not moving forward he provides a good point of reference within the second picture where the ball is at an absolute minimum level with him as to the direction the ball went in after his poor attempt to catch.

Of course this is the common sense approach.

As i have mentioned, this could happen 1000 times and 999 times be called a knock on and not questioned.

If the touch judge called this it was by luck rather than judgement at full speed.

He did well to infringe the play the ball from australia!

It really wasn't, and they really didn't.

To be fair here, Sir knew exactly what he was doing. He places himself in front of Joel then stands still. If he didn't lean into Hall, it's not a penalty but as he makes a conscious effort to "obstruct" him, penalty.

I can see why Silverwood didn't give it for the above reason of him just placing himself in a position to collect a potentially spilt ball. Keith Senior made a career out of this play. I wouldn't have called a penalty on that but also I would have pinged Briers for the "knock-on" which actually wasn't. Mistakes happen, no players are perfect, neither are refs but on this occasion it appears they for the majority correct.

People complaining about challenge in the air though, don't be silly.

And the other classic, Woodies punch should be a red card. Every game with a bit of spice would be abandoned and Bailey would play less minutes than Stuart Fielden in 2 years.

I've seen worst reffing this season alone, but don't let me spoil a good old conspiracy theory that Silverwood is also on the Wire "over the cap" wage bill.