bobbruce

It was never that he was down as a 12 week recovery that would’ve ended his season. Instead he’s back in 10/11 weeks

He came on in this game so should get more minutes next week.

KR have had a couple of chances to set up for a drop goal. I hope they don’t end up regretting not taking it.

No he thought it was a try that’s why he sent it up as a try.

Check the law posted by Padge above.

That is not how the game has ever been reffed. The law states not seeing the ball grounded is not a reason to disallow a try. So if the ref believes hes got it down he should award the try even if he hasn’t actually seen it on the ground.

No it shouldn’t.

Been Walkers best game for a long time and he gets a well deserved try.

No he can’t get involved in that tackle at all.

It’s actually the other way round Saints forwards get good go forward on the back of Makinson and Percival’s early carries. If you can stop those two you go along way to stopping Saints.

Fair points but I just think maybe it’s to make it easier to referee.

That was the idea of zero tackles to cut down on scrums. So a team could pick the ball up and be tackled before the advantage line and we could still play on because it’s zero tackle. I suppose it’s easier to ref if just all knock ons are zero tackle. We do still have scrums for knock ons if the ref feels the ball is so far beyond the point of the knock on that the zero tackle no longer cancels it out.

I think the plan was to get the trophy to whichever team won the league leaders on the night. Trophy started in Leigh it wouldn’t take long to get to either Salford or Saints if it was needed.

Which to be fair he won’t be anyway very few players with that number of games are.

Short answer no in general like off the back of a kick but I wouldn’t be massively against it if you took the ball into your own in goal. If say you were tackled and driven back into the in goal.

To be fair I should’ve known Wigan would be the moral victors in all this.

The water companies being a perfect example. It’s cheaper to dump untreated sewage into the water ways and pay the fines than to deal with it properly. I feel I may be going topic.

He won’t be selected for the reserves,he won’t be on the bench and he won’t play any minutes. He’s using the reserve game to cancel out his ban.

Ritson looks like one of those players who’s an absolute flyer until he gets the ball in his hands.

Has anyone checked the interchanges from the semi final yet.

A simple way to fix any issues here is to give players bans in weeks rather than games. Secondly when handing out this ban I’m 100% certain the disciplinary new that Wigan would be able to use this to allow French to play in the semi. So they were obviously happy that was punishment enough.

They have but the reserve team game only comes into it if the first team doesn’t have a fixture.

I’m not sure what you mean he can’t play in it he’s banned but the reserve game will clear his ban.

They’ll have plans I suppose we’ll see how it unfolds. I’m pretty sure though clubs get into negotiations sometimes without any intention to sign but to make sure a SL rival have to pay up to get a player. I’m not saying this is happening here as Wigan have been linked to him a few times over the last few years. It’s still worth baring in mind when these rumours come out.

The argument could be those three teams are very good right across the 13 players. Whereas Leigh have a few players maybe at the lower end quality wise but 5/6 players who have been outstanding to make up for it. I can see the argument for Miski over Charnley and I’d probably go Mulhern over Amone. I think I’d back Asiata,Lam and Ipape to be in though.