Dave T

Jees Lowfield, you still banging on about this game, just because you lot turned up and had a good away day? Plenty of teams' fans have a better time when they have a big away game. Please don't take this the wrong way, but it was novel for your fans to have a trip to Warrington, playing in a game with a crowd three or four times your regular crowds, whereas it was a bog-standard home game against a lower division team with a lower crowd than normal for the home fans, so clearly the Warrington fans wouldn't be dancing around in pubs bladdered at midday.

Absolutely agree, and it wasn't a criticism of Silverwood as it was a tough call, as if he did see it, he will have simply seen it hitting something yellow, which both kits had plenty of, and that same excuse can certainly be used for the linesman too. I suspected there was an offside, however you can only pull the game up if you see it, and I don't think anybody could be sure until the replay came, which was too late for a VR decision to be called for. Whilst it may have been at a crucial time, I'm glad it didn't turn out to be the match-winning try, and there is certainly an argument for a forward pass for the Leeds try anyway.

Common sense should have prevailed, and I think you are spot on with the third try, and Silverwood clearly couldn't tell a yellow ###### from an elbow. There are two issues which should be cleared up for future years. As has been said, Leeds only true colour clash all year is Warrington, and it doesn't make sense to have the same colours for home and away kits. Warrington have done this in the past, and it is silly. This shouldn't be allowed to happen, there is no reason why Warrington should have to wear their away kit at home (they didn't in the league game, and there was a clash there too). The second thing, the RFL should have ensured that there was an adequate difference, and if that meant changing protocol so that Warrington would have had to wear their 2nd strip, then so be it, although this should be pre-empted in the first place.

1 - harsh, but 2 - Great to hear, love hearing examples of new fans loving our game, it's been a pleasure having the likes of Cofi on here this year for example. 3 - Thanks for acknowledging that, I only got to watch the match again last night, and based on some of the comments here I wondered whether my perception of our performance had been influenced by the occasion, but actually, I still think we were excellent, and it is good that some people can acknowledge that.

TBH mate, I think a few people are a touch lazy with their summary of the game being that Leeds were dismal and Wire just did what they had to. Funnily enough we haven't had any credit on this cup run, as apparently Hudds and Catalans were also dire and offered no opposition whatsoever. The fact is that this Leeds team are a big game team, look what they have done to Saints for the last few years, yet we did the same to Leeds. The fact is that Leeds weren't horrendous, they were just outplayed on the day. Their forwards couldn't make the hard yards, and this then made the playmakers look out of sorts. It's not as if the team was falling off tackles left right and centre or making error after error (the last error stat I saw was 9-8 in Wire's favour), they simply lost the arm wrestle against a superior pack, and Warrington's scrambling defence was outstanding. I posted this on another thread, but I am disappointed with some people's summary of the game being low on quality, I completely disagree. It may not have been tense and close, but like the Grand Final a couple of years back when Leeds beat Saints 33-6, it was enoyable and high on quality play. Whilst I appreciate that Warrington are not a popular team on these boards, I think it is good for the game that a team outside of the traditional Super League Big 4 put in a performance like that against one of the traditional giants. Prior to the start of the season, Leeds were hot favourites for everything, and nobody looked past Leeds and Saints. So far, two trophies have been decided and they haven't won any of them.

At the start of the game, I thought the stadium looked stunning, it was packed, apart from Club Wembley. Sure there may have been the odd little block, but you may have been talking blocks of 30-40 seats from clubs who hadn't sold their allocation for example. Also, one point about blocks of red seats, there were a couple of sections at the Leeds end where there were fans of a club in all red shirts, and on TV i thought they looked like empty seats!!! Unfortunately, due to the fact that people are drinking themselves silly, people are up and down queuing at the bar and toilet, meaning that the actual stadium doesn't stay full for long!

Good points - pretty much everything about the actual match! Bad points - for the second year running the whole pre and post-match experienced was ruined by the absolutely shocking sound system. It really is the worst I have experienced at any stadium I have ever been to.

Something I have thought before, and maybe this is quite negative, but why not have a 3rd place playoff, and hold a double header at Wembley on final day? I know it is manipulating things to ensure that England are pretty much guaranteed to appear on the finals day, but hey, we need to be realistic about what we can achieve. Another alternative is to have a double header at Wembley for the semi finals, and then the Final at a more reasonable stadium like the City of Manchester Stadium.

To be fair mate, that's not just Saints fans, it's just pretty natural that when you get gangs of lads ###### up, you will get some instances of trouble,whether that is in the pub before or after, unfortunately this was highlighted more as it was during the game. This is why it is not really hooliganism as such, it is cimply feckwits who can't handle their beer, and I don't think it really matters who they support, they will happily brawl with their own fans no problem.

Not getting involved in the childish arguments, but it is always disappointing to see trouble in or around a ground. One point I will make is that I have also seen trouble at Grand Finals involving Wigan v Bradford and Saints v Leeds. Unfortunately there will always be blokes who can't handle their beer. I actually thought the stewards were pretty poor, as you could see it was going to go off for about 5minutes. The fans were stood up watching it escalate, and only a few security blokes went down. Only a few blokes actually involved in the fight, but then you obviously get other people being knocked over, which is pretty disappointing as it could have happened in our corner, where I was stood with my mum and dad and my mate had his toddlers, and that's not good if innocent people are getting caught up in it.

Penalties are there to punish a team when they do something wrong. That suggests that every time a penalty is the outcome from a scrum, then it was wrong, as in that isn;t what was meant to happen at all. Surely there is a flaw in the system if it is seen as a positive that penalties are given on the back of scrums. Surely that should be the minority, and it should take one time to go in and have a battle for the ball and get on with the game?

You were wrong on the salary cap. You thought the 50% rule was still in, and it isn't, so not sure why you would bring that up again. I said if you believed that Riley did nothing wrong then you are 'clueless'. Fair enough if you disagreed about the severity of what he did, but he had a perfect chance to put Briscoe on his ###### and stop the move, and he didn't. Not sure of your logic here. I said Briscoe's work with the ball ie. squeezing it into the corner of the field under extreme pressure, was very good. Again, not sure why you are saying I am claiming there was no skill on show, it seems it is you contradicting yourself, as a couple of lines above you are saying that I compliment him! My issue was that this move could have been stopped as Briscoe was catching the ball. Riley decided to come up fast. He didn;t complete the tackle. Once Briscoe was given a sniff, he took it brilliantly. The way he got the ball down in the corner was class. Read back through the thread, you will see that I have given Briscoe credit all through it.

You won't get me disagreeing with your judgement on Briscoe. I would love to see him at Warrington. Your missed tackles point is a valid one, but the fact is that he is still missing those tackles. There have ben a fair few instances where he has been caught out of position and simply stuck his hand up as the opposition go over him. Also, fair comment on the chase back for Richards, it was an excellent effort. Riley has improved out of sight this year, and is a valuable player, but some of the defensive work IMHO has been poor recently, and is starting to cost us a fair few points. My posts are simply about this area, not his all round play. In terms of not going to games lately, I have been to a fair few this year, and luckily we have been on Sky a lot. I have seen 19 of our games this year. I also acknowledge that stats don't tell the whole story, but his tackle completion ratio is appalling. It sits at 80%, which is worse than most of his rivals, I only found Peter Fox to be lower than him, and he missed a shocking 37 tackles.

Yep, sorry I got a bit confused with my response about the original post, but I still stand by the fact that 4th is a much, much better position to finish that 5th. By finishing 4th, you have the chance to put in a good performance and play at home in the major semi. By finishing 5th, this is impossible. Take away the first week issue, and the overall three week playoff is heavily seeded in favour of 4th over 5th. I also think that if you are 4th and take a hiding and collapse at the 1st placed team then you either man up and come back stronger, or you didn't really deserve to be through anyway. If you finish 5th, the chances are you will need to win two games to even get a chance to play 1st.

Not a lot wrong with your proposals, but whilst we need to be ambitious, we also need to be careful. Taking a game like Lebanon v USA and getting 4k at the DW Stadium for example would be a PR disaster. It is also far too easy for people to say 'get the marketing right'. What exactly does that mean? I think a thread on how the RFL, the clubs, and the fans can publicise and market the tournament would be more relevant that just naming a load of big grounds.

Not sure why you think I need to calm down, my post was perfectly reasonable and I thought well structured. My point wasn't unlikely to happen at all. Your scenario was much more unlikely. Last season we had a freak season in that (and whatever offence this causes) certain teams over-performed and many under-performed. Leeds will possibly take 4th this year, and will be very good from there. There are no situations whatsoever that a 5th placed finish ould be more beneficial than 4th. Results could well mean that 5th could do better than 4th, but they will have had to do it in more difficult circumstances than 4th, without question. I'm really a bit baffled as to why you think any situation could make 5th better than 4th. It is impossible no matter what situation you put together. Impossible.

No, most RL fans actually do understand this, and the sheer number of penalties in Union is one of the major issues RL fans have with Union. Penalties lead to more scrums, which lead to penalty tries, or kicks at goal, and that just isn't Rugby. A succesful scrum should surely be all about restaring the play, not getting a penalty!

Not absurd in the slightest. Let's put a couple of scenarios together. Leeds finish 4th - they win at Wigan, they get through to the major semi at home. 1 game from the final at home. Brilliant. Leeds finish 5th, they beat Crusaders (8th) at home. They then have to play Warrington or Hull away, and then Wigan or Saints away. You honestly think that there isn't a massive difference in those scenarios? There is also the fact that if they lose their first game from 5th they are out, whereas 4th will always get a second chance. The difference is absolutely massive, probably the biggest difference in the playoffs, and it surprised me you actually picked these two places as your example, as there are much better examples to show flaws in the system. By the way - I don't disagree that the top 5 or 5 playoff system may have been better, just focussing on this on point.

4th has a massive advantage over 5th. If Leeds finish 4th and go to Wigan and win, then they go straight through to the major semis and have a week off. They will then get home advantage in that major playoff. Massive difference between 4th and 5th.

So I think the answer to the question is 'no, we can't clear it up!!!'

Don't worry I didn't think you were having a go, just adding some context around my comments. Your final summary is a very fair comment tbh. With the ball I have no issues, I just worry whenever teams target him, and I just hope it doesn't cost us in a big game (next Saturday!!!)

JB, I'm sure you know my posts well enough by now to know that I do not criticise any players lightly, especially players of my team (local ones at that!). I was pleased that he made amends with the two tries, and I like his kick return speed, so I am not against Riley, I am just worried that he is missing more and more one-on-one tackles on a more regular basis now. I made this judgement before looking at the stats which comprehensively backed up my point.

So Riley did everything right then? My post wasn't about Briscoe, but if you think that try was unstoppable, then you are clueless. Briscoe pretty much caught that ball stood still, and should have bene put on his ######. What he did with the ball was very impressive, but if you think Riley did nothing wrong there, then it's not really worth continuing the debate.

I have commented on this issue a few times over the past few months tbh, some of his defencsive work has been poor at best. I don't get to many games at the moment, but I always at least watch the tries back, and more and more tries are the result of an ineffective 1on1 tackle from him. The good work from Briscoe was after the miss, if Riley is going to shoot out of the line and hit his opposite number, then it needs to be a proper hit - it wasn't and it gave Briscoe half a chance which is all he needed! Riley has missed 25 tackles compared to Hicks' 9.

No, it suggests that any final anywhere in the world is more attractive than a bog-standard game. Cup finals are events that get the whole towns involved and always have been. People use the term glory-hunters, and that's up to them, but I don't necessarily agree. We are going in a group of 12 this year, and probably only 2 or 3 of us could be classed as regulars (I don't attend regularly but my Season Ticket does!). People bring their wives, husbands, kids etc who wouldn't normally attend. There is no surprise, and 25k fans at Wembley will never ever equate to 25k at a regular home game.