Mother's Day tomorrow, or as it's known in Wigan "Valentines Day".

Just imagine the confusion on fathers day!

It's perfectly illegal for Wigan to tackle. Yes we get it.

Oh and Finch punching? Must have missed that, I did see Cross swinging quite a few times though, most notably at S. Tomkins but no doubt that's all fine and dandy.

It is nice to see Wigan fans proven wrong again. They claim they have such impeccable defense and such flamboyant attack. When in truth they have turnstiles for defense behind the twenty, there attack is clumsy and errors are frequent and they cheat and spit their dummy out when they are not getting what they want.

In the off season they claimed to be the most entertaining rugby. My left bollok, they are.

ive also noticed they like to lie on in the tackle..wonder if the stop watch will come out in boots n all just to highlight this point..

Bet they don't sell many Fathers Days cards in Warrington

This thread is pretty pathetic from both sets of fans. Why is it that a thread like this always turns into pointless arguments.

Why? Will we fail to make the playoffs if we lose?

Now you're getting it !

A tackle around the legs is a tackle, that's OK when the player is running and you catch and gather his legs together to effect the tackle. When a player is standing and you hit the leg below the knee and bend and twist the leg up that is not a tackle that is a dangerous action which could lead to career ending injury. Why can't your players hit above the knee because you can still gather the legs and complete the desired effect - a well controlled and executed tackle.

I do agree that Wigan players do this all the time, Tompkins on Cunningham - last season, Leuluai - last week and Lima last night. By this I can only believe that it is coached!

Open your anti wigan eyes, watch the game and you will see that the first point of impact was actually on the thigh

The tackle was not on the standing leg and the player was still moving.
If the Leeds player had managed to offload the ball in the tackle, everyone would be having a go at Lima for not attempting the tackle.

I've never seen a player offload it with his leg.

Who says I'm anti Wigan? I'm not. I'm anti dangerous play but as we were discussing the incident last night I commented on that. I'm not sure you are correct about the impact, I'm certain he angles down onto the knee and he still lifted and twisted the leg, no other reason for that than to make the other player 'uncomfortable'.

Another point to consider when talking about first point of ccontact; is it not true that when the initial contact is on the chest but the arm finishes in the face of the tackled player, this is penalised because of the end result and not the initial contact?

It's more about the point of impact coupled with the lifting and twisting of the leg, if you don't see that as a problem for any team or player then I'm a little concerned. I wonder what your comments would have been if Ryan Bailey had done the same to Sam Tompkins?

Oh and by the way I didn't say it was on the standing leg I said the player was standing..........makes a difference as you pointed out with your miss quote

Don't understand the applause for this comment. I didn't say that there is anything wrong with tackling around the legs or that three man tackles are not allowed, I advocate three man tackles with my players. This is about control of the ruck, we also adopt the third man making contact round the legs to complete the tackle and gain extra control/time doing so.

the issue is where you make the initial contact and then how that process is completed, and I can assure you it's not by lifting and twisting the leg this is reckless and dangerous...........that was my point.

I was at the game. When I saw it I thought it was a sin bin (under the new directive).
However, when I watched the sky+ replay I changed my mind.
Have look at this.


Ablett is still moving. The tackle is NOT on the standing leg.

It wasn't even a penalty.
We're in danger of turning the game into basketball.

It wasn't Ablett Rogues, it was Clarkson.

Correct, my mistake. There was still nothing wrong in the tackle, but I can understand on first viewing why the decision was made.(I didn't think Sammots try tonight was try until I saw the replay, about four times)

Still not listening are you .......didn't say it was the standing leg!!!!! I said the player was standing......I.e. Not running!!!!!

it's about where he ATTACKS the SINGLE leg.......a right decision was made on the evidence, it doesn't matter if he is moving or not Lima attacked the SINGLE leg and then bent it to give the player pain.....end of story, I'll be honest with you I would have the same feelings if it was any other player from any other team including my own........he did it.......accept it.......you bought him to be rough and tough didn't you!

The photo is useless because he hasn't made the impact yet so it proves nothing!!!!!

I saw three or four tackles tonight that were very similar, that never got penalised. You'll probably see the same tomorrow.
IMO after watching the sky+ replay there was nothing in the Lima incident, but as I said at the game it did look bad.
Let's see what the review panel come up with, and I'll go with that.

i saw one that got penalised and put on report, just purely for the action, of coming in third man on a prone upright tackled player

Saw the same, it's certainly part of the three man tackle if you get the timing/positioning wrong. just like the head high tackle that starts on the chest and ends in the face.

I think my only issue is that as coaches we all look for the next aspect of the game we can push and stretch to gain the advantage, this then needs to be regulated properly and quickly so we don't end up like football!

The review panel will see it for what it is without our emotion, and like you I'll go with their decision. Warning sufficient in my opinion.

He has previous and this is the third time this season he has looked dodgy in the tackle.