I'd be happy to if it meant getting away from your nonsense....

I'd have been disappointed if we'd have lost but credit to Warrington they are a real force in SL XV....

Good luck in all your other games, except the one at the Piedome

Thanks mate, you demonstrated tonight what a quality side you are and just how dangerous you can be. Really thought you were going to run away with it at one stage. It's great to see Monaghan at his best, the guy is quality through and through, and as much as a lot of opposition fans don't like him (plenty of my own teams included) a performing Lee Briers is a joy to watch for any true RL fan, the guy is capable of things that few if any others in SL are.

agree this topic should be locked... ...after this superleague.co.uk/table.php?rid=324

agree this topic should be locked... ...after this superleague.co.uk/table.php?rid=324

Quote ="DannyRic"agree this topic should be locked... ...after this superleague.co.uk/table.php?rid=324 '" Lets see what its like after round 27 not round 3 mate, you'll be top till tommorrow.

Quote ="DannyRic"agree this topic should be locked... ...after this superleague.co.uk/table.php?rid=324 '" Lets see what its like after round 27 not round 3 mate, you'll be top till tommorrow.

A great game of rugby league. A credit to both sides. A good atmosphere and we certainly were not robbed. It just goes to show how well matched the 2 teams are is that the result depended on a dropped ball inches from the line.

Why losing Lee " the Axe " Briers from our defensive line caused us to concede 3 tries in 15 minutes I havent got a clue.

Congratulations to Wigan ... a draw would have been a fair result but also credit to Monaghan ( or whoever made the brave decision) for going for the win instead of taking an attempt at the 2 points.

Great to see .. Shame it didnt come off

You do realise that every one thinks you're extremely immature ?

you ready for school on Monday?

Act like a grown up because you're doing irreplicable damage to our reputation and the integrity of this forum.

Plus I usually like to stick up for the victimised but in your case you need to learn to act more mature.

[url=http://www.getphpbb.com/phpbb/index.php?mforum=leaguefreakThere already is an "Idiots Forum" in existence.[/url

dont think we were robbed we got 16-4 up at ht and cant defend for 40 mins is why we got beat . we had a opportunity to take the 2 and have the ball back in the last 2 minutes but we chose to be greedy and go for 4 and unfortunately it didnt pay off. i seen a few of the replays as i was there and close to the screen but i didnt see it all only 1 i think was wrong is when gleeson took out king but the rest i thought was ok..

HAHA. yes, of course. seeing as though king was pushing him back and gleeson ran into him deliberatley. Gleeson knows what he was trying to do. and suceeded. NO TRY.

I do not deny Gleeson did not know what he was doing I am sure he did, but in that situation he did not have the prerogative to get out of the way and nor should he.

Clearly a try, the scoreboard says so, the ref says so and every non bias fan with a grasp of the rules of the game would also agree.

now you're saying King tackled Gleeson?

King maybe could of stopped the try if he wasn't deliberatley taken out by Gleeson.

In your opinion what should Gleeson have done? stopped supporting the ball carrier?

What should he have done? Stopped running??

What should he have done? Stopped playing?

Sorry, was feeling left out.

I didn't say that. Good support play is not running and obstructing a defending player.

so i ask again what should Gleeson have done? Should he have run out of the way giving King a clear shot at the tackle?

How many games of RL have you actually seen? Because you're coming across like this was your first TBH.

If the boot were on the other foot regarding the Gleeson incident and it had been Warrington scoring the try instead of Wigan. In the exact same circumstances i would have been mightily hacked off if the try had been disallowed.

It always puts a better perspective on the incident if you think of your team as the so-called sinners, not the sinned against.

But to certainly not go ahead and obstruct king.
and so i ask again. on your previous reply of ''Matt king could of been done for a tackle without the ball''
your saying king tackled gleeson?

Mate the ref did not give it, the video ref did not give it and the try stood. A wire player made contact with Gleeson while he was running a support line knocking him into Roberts, if that was King, which i think it was i feel there was more justification to call for a penalty to Wigan than claim an obstruction.

Thankfully the refs got it right and the rest is purely speculation. The try was correctly awarded, Wigan won and you are having trouble dealing with it, despite the evidence and facts.

How anyone can say a supporting runner is obstructing play is beyond me. If this was the case, every time someone made a break and there was more than 1 person in support, the try would have to be disallowed



Matt King tackled Gleeson as well, it's not like Gleeson stopped him from getting to Amos, King just read it wrong and had a stinker really.

As I have said on many other topics. GOOD GAME. WELL DONE WIGAN, I just think some decisions were harsh. It's called a discussions forum, I'm entitled to an opinion.

Your defence on this is getting embarrassing get off your high horse and admit Wigan beat you fairly.