Promote; give a higher position to, elevate, move up, raise,

Whereas I know you don't.

Careful, we'll be getting Rovers fans back on here next with their definition of 'promote' and it will get even more messy.

Personally, I'm glad Liam's back for Thursday and hope it will galvanise the team further for the final run in.

100%, the RFL were never going to criticise the officials, but we've got him back and he'll be raring to go, along with Ellis and a few others who could return.

AS a Wakey fan I'd much rather Watts was not playing on Thursday, but it was never a sending off in a million years. McIlorum was trying to put a big shot on and got done by his own poor technique. Glad Watts didn't get a ban and I feel that Hull would have won that game if they had 13 /17 men available.

Glad Watts is available but it was a bad decision to send him off. The SOS verdict is a grudging admission by the RFL that they got this wrong but to save face they have gone for that rather than "not guilty" which is also an option. As has been commented already an awful lot else happened in this game which has been ignored. Same as the Wigan v Saints game the week before which was a very nasty affair yet resulted in one warning and little else. The common factor in both game? The cheating pies of course. It seems their games are held to a far more liberal interpretation of what is acceptable compared to other teams.

So what did Wigan do in the Saints game?

I also assume every game of RL not involving Wigan is a game played without any foul play whatsoever? Get real.

There's 16 pages of drivel regarding a red card incident that is now done and dusted. We have the rest of the season to look forward to now including a big game against Wakefield on Thursday, so if you want to discuss wigan, you'll be better off going on the wigan forum

OK Dave...

You're welcome, Standee

Without wasting too much time on a blind moron like you, you are the same fool on another thread who thought that Powell's cannonball tackle that ended a player's season was fairly dealt with.

All games have incidents of foul play, cheating and injury, just in Wigan's games it occurs at a higher frequency.

I didn't bring up Wigan's "cheating". Nothing to say to them? Thought not.

I've still never had an answer to this question and I've been asking for years. Looks like I'll still be left wanting...



Speaking of blind. I didn't say it was fairly dealt with. I offered no opinion whether it was fair or not, someone said he wasn't punished and I said he was as he received a 1 game ban.

So you still don't want to bring any stats to the table to prove your point? You have an opportunity, and I'm sure everyone would love to finally get some real concrete proof of their conduct being worse than other RL teams. Right now you may aswell accuse Wigan of fielding pixies and unicorns because you have as much proof of that.

Here's Leon Pryce's advice for Liam

[urlhttps://twitter.com/leonpryce6/status/907569076230336512[/url

Maybe not, the decision has now be altered to "No Charge".

Has someone slipped an envelope under a door at red hall?

We tried to, but the queue was that long we changed our mind.

Wigan squad update for Cas

Hicks rested.

Thaler brought into squad.

From the Wigan forum but you have to laugh

Hicks will be a big miss, but Thaler won't let them down.
Wigan do seem to have strength in depth in that department.

In true Wigan tradition, both Thaler and Hicks don't count on their Salary cap either.

Rumour is that Red Hall are subsidising much of their wages, in order to keep them from going to Union or NRL.

If elbow and forearm weren't promoted as said by the disciplinary panel then how do they come to the conclusion of sending off sufficient! Why can't they say the VR (Bentham) got it wrong

Because they never do or never have

Bentham's a referee, in his opinion it was a sending off thus he was duly sent off, the panel aren't there to judge referees' they're just a panel what are there to administer an appropriate course of action to the player, and just because they say it's sending off sufficient does not mean that Bentham got it wrong or that Watts was innocent.

He was - but the on the pitch ref was unduly influenced by the VR ... whispering in his ear that it was reckless.
He should not be, and TBH the VR should NOT be allowed to do it. Especially as you don't have the VR in every game.