Well said.

If it wasn't a "likely" scoring opportunity why did McGuire injure himself in the process of preventing Carmont from supporting Richards? He clearly thought there was a real chance that leeds could have lost.

A lot of leeds fans are so annoyed that they will be without their star player for so long they blindly refuse to accept what he did was wrong. Over the last week we've heard everything from "Wigan wouldn't have scored" to frankly pathetic comments that the injury happened before he grabbed hold of Carmont. How many leeds fans have said "what McGuire did was wrong - and he paid far too steep a price for it"? Not many.

This was then reinforced by the leeds coach who has still failed to mention McGuire's actions or apologise to members of the Wigan team for accusing them for injuring McGuire when he was on the floor. Rather than admit he was wrong and own his comments; he has got Peacock to wade in and complain in the press as well to back him up.

Saying Wigan wouldn't have scored is exactly the same as Wigan fans saying Wigan would have scored both unknown quantities.
Again the plain facts are McGuire didn't cost Wigan the game, Wigan and in particularly Richards blew it plain and simple.

And of course what McGuire did was 'wrong'. It was a professional foul and deserved a penalty and at worst a yellow card. What irks leeds fans is the total over reaction and that somehow McGuire deserved to have a career threatening injury for it.

FWIW I'm not a fan of what both Peacock and Mclennan have said on the press, and I'm especially not a fan of what Phil Clark said in the press.

Please mate stop talking Sense...

McLennan and Peacock are irate at Phil Clarke's article, and rightly so. He's the biggest moron in the whole affair.

Imagine if Wayne Rooney pulls back Steven Gerrard outside the penalty area in the last minute of a game, giving away a free-kick but tearing his ligaments in the process. Alan Hansen says on TV that Rooney deserves to be hospitalized and out of the game for eight months. How would Ferguson react? How would anyone react?

It's unfortunate for Wigan that Clarke is wholly associated with their club, but that's testament to his unprofessionalism as well.

FFS. Whats happend has happend, its not the end of the world, and we get to see (hopefully) another classic between 2 very good teams. It's time to move on.

The reaction of a few fans regarding Mcguire deserving of his injury was while the wounds were still fresh and I would imagine many views have been somewhat tempered. You will always get fans who still hold that opinion and in this free country of ours they have as much right as you to their opinion. Deal with it!!!

I would say the same ammount of Leeds fans who are prepared to accept that Mcguire cheated is about the same amount of wigan fans who think he got what he deserved. Not many!!

Peacock are Bluesy coming out in the press is an embarasment to the Leeds club IMO..

Back up a bit. Fester kicked off straight after the game, way before Clarke's article. Giving him the benefit of the doubt he could have made his (totally wrong) accusation that McGuire was taken out off the ball without speaking to the player or seeing a replay. However, when he subesquently realised he was totally in the wrong he could and should have diffused the whole situation. Instead he bleated to the press on another couple of occasions.

Bit far fetched that a lunchbox or it's contents would make it onto the pitch, but then again this is Wigan supporters we're talking about so why not.

WUM. Just been reading your efforts on the Rhino's forum!

Clarke has no association with Wigan at the present time. And he doesn't speak for Wigan. You and others like you are associating him with Wigan because it suits you to.

What's sticking in your craw is that Wigan have not responded to the childish comments by McLennan in his after-match interview, and they certainly won't be responding to Jamie Peacock any more than they'd respond to the barking of a rather foolish dog on a streetcorner.

At the end of the day, this whole McGuire thing is being massively over-egged. I've said it before and I'll say it again - Wigan lost the match because they failed to take their chances. But McLennan and Peacock trying to cast Leeds as victims is not going to wash in this neck of the woods. Sorry, but there it is.

The whole uproar is ridiculous, never has so much been OTT crying resulted from so little. We've had the Leeds captain, coach and England captain all whining in public, it's embarrassing.

Firstly, I'm associating Clarke with Wigan because he *seems* to represent Wigan fans. I know that the club have no responsibility for what he says, and should not be judged by him. But what Clarke and some fans here have said with hyperbole about "crime" and "justice" and wishing serious injury on a player can be judged as ridiculous and unacceptable.

Secondly,I might be wrong on this, but I don't remember McLennan accusing anyone of injuring Danny McGuire. I remember that straight after the match he said he had concerns about how McGuire suffered his injury, and that the authorities should look at the tape. Given that everyone's focus was elsewhere (where should the penalty be taken? will he score it?), I don't see a problem with that - nobody at that time knew what had happened when McGuire was on the floor. It was worth looking into, it was looked into, there was nothing in it. End of that particular story.

And, yes, the story has been overegged. It's fine that Wigan are keeping quiet about it. It's also fine that Leeds are choosing to play it another way, but to be fair there has been nothing massively incendiary in McLennan's comments if you look at them in full. As is the way with these things, the headlines have distorted, and the forums have distorted further.

That's the way things go before important games: it's been like this before Leeds-Saints knockout games over the past few years, and Saints-Bradford games before that. You've probably forgotten what it's like...

It certainly is. I've kept out of it for the most part but my take on it is this. McGuire did exactly the right thing for his team and unfortunately injured himself as a result. Fester jumped the gun. He should have apologised for this and then shut up. Piggy and TL were out of order, though their actions have been over exposed due to the seriousness of the injury. TL apologised, Piggy should have followed suit. Phil clarke can say what he wants as a Sky pundit as long as his superiors are happy. Anyone from Leeds has a right of response but would have been far better advised to maintain a dignified silence, just as Wigan RLFC did after Fester outrageous allegations. No more to add IMO.

Ye-hey ... a bit of cattiness after what was otherwise a decent post. But I can live with that. We still get a lot of it at Wigan despite the wishful thinking of our rivals.

You're right to italicise the 'seems' when it comes to Clarke representing Wigan views.

It may 'seem' that way to Leeds fans, but I'm not sure why. The handful of idiots who celebrated McGuire's injury on this message board were roundly condemned for it on here over the following days. Some of you chaps have short memories, or you're just pretending that it never happened so that you can slip more comfortably into the victim guise.

I'm hoping for Clarke v Barrie Mac on Boots tonight...should be fun!

No. I think we all know- he was trying to deny Carmont a potentially try scoring opportunity through illegal means i.e. he was cheating.

As for the "end of story" well if he wasn't injured then I believe a one match ban would have been justified.

However, his injury has ensured that justice has been done in this respect.


In actual fact I believe the result was the RIGHT one for Wigan. We needed that extra game vs Hull KR and will have no problems going away to Leeds- the fact that McGuires cheating, and the subsequent Leeds bleating may prove to motivate us further, is just the icing on the cake.

If the result suited Leeds too, then good luck to them.

Personally I think that if Deacon plays, we will demolish Leeds on Saturday, and I think the Leeds management know this too.

A one match ban for obstruction?

Given the importance of the obstruction yes.

Do you actually post on your own forum btw? You seem to spend most of your time on those of other teams.

I know Stains are a small club in one of the most "disadvantaged" parts of the country. Surely they could do with their fans posting on there to cheer them up a tad?

So obstruction deserves a ban depending on how many minutes of a game have elapsed and the importance of the game





There isn't much hysterical screaming going on over there at the moment so there is less to laugh at than on the Wigan and Leeds boards (like people advocating match bans for obstruction), although I have posted there today. Thanks for your interest, I'm flattered.

Yes.

If I drive at 35mph in a 30 then I will get 3 points

If I drive at 35mph in a 30 and knock someone over, I will get a much harsher penalty.

The situation is always relevant.

No it isn't, your analogy is rubbish. An obstruction on the first minute can have just as much influence on the outcome as one in the last.

Theres a big difference in those two though isnt there? The first one is driving without care but the second one you could have killed somebody!

Rarely will you see two obstructions that are so different!

You cant give bans for stuff like that because there will be so many "grey areas" so to speak it will kick off even more than it does now.