Wellsy4HullFC

Irrelevant. McDonnell starting his run first goes not give him right to obstruct. But he will have known a Warrington player will have been chasing towards where the ball was landing to either contest the ball or tackle the catcher. Assuming he's completely ignorant of this (which he's not, he's a professional rugby league player), ignorance is not an excuse to run a line that isn't towards the ball and is obstructing players. Williams ran a line towards the catcher. He knew McDonnell was running across his line. He took advantage of the situation. *Did he milk it? Absolutely. *Was McDonnell running across his line though and not towards the ball? Yes. *Did that prevent Williams contesting for the ball? No, because he probably wouldn't have made it. *Did it prevent Williams tackling the catcher? Yes. Therefore, it's a penalty. He was prevented from putting pressure on the catcher, which could have resulted in him dropping it. He was prevented from tackling the catcher, which gave Leeds extra yards. People seem fixated on the idea that he had to be within a distance that would allow him to contest the ball. The only reason people seem to be ignoring everything wrong that McDonnell did (however slight and subtle) is because Williams milked it, and rugby culture dictates that complaining or bringing attention to anything wrong is bad.

There were numerous times players shielded. There's numerous forward passes. Numerous incidents of foul play or errors that go without notice. This one didn't. That's sport. Williams forced a decision.

What a game!

I'm not sure what your point is here? The first part implies it happens all the time and the second part implies it didn't happen?

McDonnell is running a shielding line. He's trying to kid the ref by looking at the ball but not actually running towards it. The ball is coming towards the fullback. This type of play is done all the time. It's very subtle, but against the rules so rarely gets pulled up unless someone clearly gets impeded. Williams has every right to run the line he's running. He's running towards the catching fullback. He won't get the ball, but can get the player. The shielding player prevents him doing that. The first incident (shielding) is the penalty. Without that, the collision cannot take place and the simulating cannot happen. Looks bad, but if they don't shield, they don't simulate. It's exactly why I was annoyed with the Amir Bourouh penalty (and rejection after Captain's Challenge) when he passed the ball into a player in the ruck in the way of his first receiver. He has every right to make that pass and it was deemed he was playing for a penalty. If there's an offence going on beforehand, he can't play for one can he! The inconsistency is the issue.

Was a clear pass off the floor. Not contentious at all. The Williams incident isn't a great look. He spots the Leeds defender doing a shielding run to protect the full back and takes advantage of it. If you don't do that, he can't simulate.

It's definitely doable. But just because we can does not mean we should. Going in headstrong with little strategy and oversight could be wasteful and damaging. Is this high risk high reward?

I don't want to go to 15 teams. I think it's unnecessarily complicated. I'd tolerate it as a way to get London in IF it was worked out well in advance. But it's not, so it's a terrible idea that will be poorly implemented. It's too late to go to 15. You either accept that London need to wait a year, or we look at other ways to fit them in the 14 and remove a club. We don't even know if they're picking based on top 14 IMG grades or top 12 + 2 committee picks. The latter would be how you'd get London in.

You're asking 6 clubs to give up a home game last minute (and likely a big home game if it's MW). Will they be compensated? If not, they're not going to.

No return of the Skolars?

PVL must have really liked that song

No, you don't take the ranking of the team you beat. That's not how it's ever worked. The highest ranked winners will get the home final. The rankings change as the playoffs progress. Currently, they are: 1. London 2. Newcastle 3. Doncaster (as they won in week 1) 4. Oldham (as they lost in week 1) So Oldham will not get a home final no matter the outcome. Newcastle or Donny will only get a home final if London lose. London are guaranteed a home final if they win. Hope that helps somehow! It's an overly complicated system that needs binning!

And yet completely expected when anyone actually read what was proposed. 5 weeks got a playoff series between 10 teams is too long, the format too confusing for no purpose whatsoever. I would love to know how this strategy was decided and who gave it the okay.

Can Scotland and Ireland claim players produced in the Southern Highlands and New Ireland?...

I was going to say, that's probably more impressive as it stops the chance of someone overtaking him by simply only taking kicks from bang in front!