Don't worry, Parrot wouldn't know neutral if it came and smacked him round the face....

I have tried to be impartial as possible but you cannot deny that the try would not have been scored of Gleeson hadn't impeded King. No way that should have stood.

No arguments with any of the other decisions though.

anothr 1 talking sense..means we wud av won...typical wigan

here here les... gleeson did obstruct king.

I don't agree....Yes, Gleeson impeded King, but did he do so illegally?.....Surely the rules state that as long as a player runs a true straight, legitimate line, in support of his team mate then he certainly does not have to make 'room' for anybody to make a tackle??

Now if Gleeson deliberately overruns his team mate in order to obstruct King, then that is illegal and should be disallowed...However, I did not see that. Yes, it certainly got messy, and there was a tangle of bodies, but in my opinion, King was as much to blame for Gleeson's end position as anything else.

In the end it didn't really matter. Wire didn't get the rub of the green over a few things in the match but that's how it goes sometimes, and the likelihood is that it will go the other way in matches later in the season, and we probably will be happy to accept a few 'controversial' decisions in our favour.

Which final did you get to? Awfully giddy about a superleague regular season win. Calm down.

Wigan got to two Grand Finals last year.

It is possible that King could have prevented the score however Gleeson did nothing wrong he was there in support of his player. There was no dileberate block. If it was the other way round i'd want to know what our player had done wrong. Fair try.

For me both attempts were tries.... The first you can clearly see Gleeson runs into the path of Matt King hence blocking him from making a tackle plus carrying him further over the line which stopped him from getting any part of his body under the player/ball..... Obstruction, No Try.

The Solomona attempt i also thought was a try, having watched it back when you see the angle from behind the player you can see the players arm on the ball as the ball touches the line, the side-on angle is useless as the try line cannot be seen but Bentham only used the behind the player angle once when looking at the try... I was able to pause the Sky + at the exact time the ball hit the line under control, if i can do that then I'm sure the VR can... something else that should work in our favour but didn't seem to was that benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking team so for me it was a try.

CBA reading back the previous pages of this thread...Probably full of trolling pie eaters....

Anyway i have no problems with most of the decisions apart from the Roberts 2nd try that was obstruction by Gleeson and should not have stood for me..
I think back to the John Clarke disallowed try at Leeds last season and the Hicks one at Wigan the season before...Both chalked off for obstructions nowhere near as bad...

The penalty against King which led to a Wigan try for holding down was also harsh...

On the whole excellent game and Wigan had a slice of luck at the end with Solamona's tiny knock on or we'd have snatched it...

Looking forward to next week V Hudds....

Warrington were the better team for 3/4 of the game but came up short on the back of some dodgy VR decisions. If the boot had been on the other foot then the Pie eaters would have been just as upset. Warrington were medioca at best last night and only just lost the game, Wigan could not play any better than they did and only just won. Wire will be in contention this season no problem.

gotta agree on this... the gleeson 'obstructing' king debate may long continue, felt very unlucky for sol though at then end and imo it was no try.

If you think that is the best Wigan play, you are sadly mistaken. I really don't understand how you can say that the first 50 minutes from Wigan, was them playing at their best?

Wigan played well for the last half an hour when Briers had gone off and you lost your way.

Don't beleive I said that. I don't think Wigan can improve on how they played last night over the course of the game. Warrington have much more to offer.

There was no doubt hence no benefit to the attacking team!

I fully agree that Wire will be in contention this season but as for dodgy VR decisions you need your eyes testing.

I think this thread should be retitled...... One word...DELUDED.

One word - SCUM!!!!!

4 x correct VR decisions End of.

Outside of that I thought a bit like the Friendly pre season I thought Wire controlled Possesion & Territory however Wigan seemed to have a bit of extra Pace around the edges to score a couple of Break Away tries.

Game could of gone either way, I can't see how either team had too much to complain about from the ref?
Briers going off certainly upset your pattern of play and we'll feel better with Phelps & Riddell back in.

Big test of both teams next week after such an intense hit out this weekend, can they both recover against 2 x big sets, one smarting from 3 x defeats on the bounce and the other seemingly hitting form?

My own take on it is it's the same type of situation as on page 39 of the "International Laws of the Game and Notes on the Laws". Shame I can't post the diagram, but situational I think it was the same, with the key sentance highligted. And it looks like the Video Ref agreed.


It is permissible for player 4, after
passing the ball, to slow down in order
to position himself for a return pass from
player 5. =#FF0040He must give ‘right of way’ to
opponents who are running across in
front of him to tackle player 5 but is not
guilty of obstructing opponents who are
coming from behind him.

This thread disrespects what was a fantastic game of RL.