Fri 22nd Sept: SL: Leigh Leopards v Wigan Warriors KO 20:00 (Sky)

[Exiled Wiganer]

4 minutes ago, EagleEyePie said:

That was the sort of game I was hoping for from a Wigan perspective. We've had it a bit easy in recent weeks and it's not a reflection of what playoff games are usually like. Last night was much closer to what we would expect for a semi-final and I think it highlighted some areas we need to work on, which is massively important at this time of year.

I thought both teams showed their strengths in different areas. For me the Leigh pack was much stronger overall. I don't think our front row was as dominant as it has been in previous games and Amone and Mulhern were head and shoulders above our middle players. I thought tactically we got it right and played to our strengths. Smith and French put in some outstanding kicks even if they were kept quiet through our inability to dominate down the middle of the field.

As for the ruled out tries, in an ideal world both would be given. For the Wigan try Lam initiates contact as Nsemba goes through and is playing for the obstruction call. He trails an arm to make it seem more obvious but for me if the defender initiates contact it should be play on. For the Leigh try I do have some sympathy for the video ref. The call basically hinges on whether O'Donnell runs at French's chest or the outside shoulder (regardless of how much contact there is) and arguably he runs at the left side of the chest and the outside shoulder. He's directly in the path of French and O'Brien when contact is made. The referee's on field call of no try means he probably got that right in terms of evidence to overturn, but everyone who loves the games knows French isn't significantly impeded by the contact and it should be a try. People shouldn't be too critical of the video ref, it's the on field call that causes most of these problems.

If French has done as Lam had done it would have been even clearer. The defender should never be punished for trying to evade an obstructing runner. In any case, we would clearly have won from there had it been given. Leigh didn’t have a play the ball in our half after then. Leigh were brave and gave us a terrific match. They should be very proud of themselves. I hope they don’t wallow in self pity, and drown in bitterness, as they still have a lot to play for next week end. 

[EagleEyePie]

29 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Must say I didn't see this at the game.

Ooh you are in bother Bevan, a few years ago any contact with the ref was hit with sinbinnings and suspensions this was as bad as any of those.

If there is any consistency Bevan  should be able to take an extended holiday back home to Aus his season here should be very over and done with, if Paul Vaughan received 4 games for a very innocuous but 'purposeful action' on an opponent then French in contacting the ref should be equal if not more.

 

It was needless, but didn't James Harrison escape a ban for this offence earlier this year as they deemed the contact unnecessary but passive as he was asking for attention? No idea what the usual punishments are for this offence these days or how they grade them. It's not comparable to Vaughan's offence (harsh as that outcome was).

[Harry Stottle]

2 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

Is that the crying or laughing emojis EW, did French make deliberate contact with the official or not? as I say if there is any justice he is sat on his brown one for a while.

Then you can comment with a crying emoji.

[Harry Stottle]

3 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

we would clearly have won from there had it been given.

So why didn't you score again to make sure?

[Harry Stottle]

3 minutes ago, EagleEyePie said:

It was needless, but didn't James Harrison escape a ban for this offence earlier this year as they deemed the contact unnecessary but passive as he was asking for attention? No idea what the usual punishments are for this offence these days or how they grade them. It's not comparable to Vaughan's offence (harsh as that outcome was).

Why these days Eagle has the rule changed?

[Exiled Wiganer]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

So why didn't you score again to make sure?

We didn’t need to, we just kept you where we wanted you. Why didn’t you? 

It’s no disgrace to lose to this Wigan team. You can hold your head high. 

[Exiled Wiganer]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Is that the crying or laughing emojis EW, did French make deliberate contact with the official or not? as I say if there is any justice he is sat on his brown one for a while.

Then you can comment with a crying emoji.

It made me laugh, and still does. What next “Look at their horrible kit, and the way they comb their hair, and they all smell of cabbage…”? Knock yourself out. 

[bromleybulldog]

Let's just hope that the RL see sense by next season and change the video referee rules so that if the match referee thinks a try has been scored, he gives it, if he thinks a try hasn't been scored, he doesn't give it and if he doesn't know he simply asks the video ref to decide with no prompting. Far too often we have seen the video ref looking at replays for countless times trying to justify what the match ref has suggested as a decision. It's a waste of time, causes games to go on for far too long and players to lose concentration. Apart from giving fans far too many opportunities to criticise the decisions on technicalities which only a 15th viewing from a fifth camera angle can reveal. Let refs make decisions quickly and let's get on with the game.

[Dave T]

Thinking more about the process, it isn't necessarily the element of the ref giving his decision, it's the part that follows. 

If the ref says 'no try' there appears to be a far higher bar for the ref to overrule that decision versus the other way round. 

When a decision is close (which by the nature of the VR, they should be close) then it makes it difficult for the VR to overrule. The VR last night was weird, the way he kept repeating 'on field decision of no try' over and over again was just odd and showed that that element was a huge factor. 

[bobbruce]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Thinking more about the process, it isn't necessarily the element of the ref giving his decision, it's the part that follows. 

If the ref says 'no try' there appears to be a far higher bar for the ref to overrule that decision versus the other way round. 

When a decision is close (which by the nature of the VR, they should be close) then it makes it difficult for the VR to overrule. The VR last night was weird, the way he kept repeating 'on field decision of no try' over and over again was just odd and showed that that element was a huge factor. 

I know you’re not a fan of this system but this for me is purely down to a weak VR. His first comments were that contact was on the inside shoulder. Then as you say kept repeating on field decision was no try and basically talked himself out of it. 

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

I know you’re not a fan of this system but this for me is purely down to a weak VR. His first comments were that contact was on the inside shoulder. Then as you say kept repeating on field decision was no try and basically talked himself out of it. 

The VR has followed that process for a reason though hasn't he? 

[bobbruce]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The VR has followed that process for a reason though hasn't he? 

My point is his first comment told him the ref was wrong and he still went with it that isn’t the systems fault. 

[17 stone giant]

1 hour ago, bobbruce said:

If that’s the reason I get it and probably a bit naughty from Sky to make out he snubbed them. 

I agree. I can't recall his exact words but my recollection is that Brian Carney suggested that Derek Beaumont wasn't letting Lam be interviewed by Sky. Hopefully the full story will come out eventually.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

It made me laugh, and still does. What next “Look at their horrible kit, and the way they comb their hair, and they all smell of cabbage…”? Knock yourself out. 

In '17 at Salford a Leigh player got sent to the sin bin and then got 4 matches, his crime was he touched the ref's forearm to remonstrate a decision, now please describe to me why without there being any rule changes why French should be let off for putting his hand on the refs shoulder to do the same?

Edited September 23, 2023 by Harry Stottle

[Exiled Wiganer]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

In '17 at Salford a Leigh player got sent to the sin bin and then got 4 matches, his crime was he touched the ref's forearm to remonstrate a decision, now please describe to me why without there being any rule changes French should be let off for putting his hand on the refs shoulder to do the same?

I am not laughing at what might or might not have happened or will happen. I am laughing at your “oo horrid Wigginers, with their horrid pies and their horrid ways” rantathon. Feel free to continue to your heart’s content: let TRL be your primal scream therapy. 

[Harry Stottle]

Just now, Exiled Wiganer said:

I am not laughing at what might or might not have happened or will happen. I am laughing at your “oo horrid Wigginers, with their horrid pies and their horrid ways” rantathon. Feel free to continue to your heart’s content: let TRL be your primal scream therapy. 

Are you feeling OK, was your exile forced or a voluntary act?

[Exiled Wiganer]

6 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Are you feeling OK, was your exile forced or a voluntary act?

I am feeling sprightly, thanks. Sadly, work took me away from the Ancient and Loyal Borough. 

You seem to have taken this very hard indeed, but it is no disgrace to lose to this Wigan side. 

[Dunbar]

53 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

I know you’re not a fan of this system but this for me is purely down to a weak VR. His first comments were that contact was on the inside shoulder. Then as you say kept repeating on field decision was no try and basically talked himself out of it. 

I agree.

While I think the NRL process is better, there was nothing in our process that meant the correct call couldn't have been made last night.

In the end, for whatever reason, the VR didn't have the confidence to overturn the on field decision as he should have.

[bobbruce]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

I agree.

While I think the NRL process is better, there was nothing in our process that meant the correct call couldn't have been made last night.

In the end, for whatever reason, the VR didn't have the confidence to overturn the on field decision as he should have.

Technically it’s exactly the same the ref makes a decision and the VR has to find a reason to overturn it. It’s just the players and fans can celebrate. It doesn’t take anytime out of the game unless he does find something. There are obviously down sides but it’s the least intrusive way of running the system. 

[Dunbar]

4 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Technically it’s exactly the same the ref makes a decision and the VR has to find a reason to overturn it. It’s just the players and fans can celebrate. It doesn’t take anytime out of the game unless he does find something. There are obviously down sides but it’s the least intrusive way of running the system. 

Is it the same?  In Super League, can a VR overule a ref if he immediately gives it on the field?

[bobbruce]

5 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Is it the same?  In Super League, can a VR overule a ref if he immediately gives it on the field?

No they clearly can’t do that by technically the same i mean the ref makes his call and it’s for the VR to find a reason to change it. The process itself is different and as I say far better in my opinion. 

[Dunbar]

5 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

No they clearly can’t do that by technically the same i mean the ref makes his call and it’s for the VR to find a reason to change it. The process itself is different and as I say far better in my opinion. 

I don't want to be argumentative, but that means they are not the same.

In the NRL, the ref can give an onfield decision of a try with the confidence that the VR will confirm the try or, if they see an issue, stop the clock and make a VR call.

That can't happen in the UK game and so ref's are far more likely to hedge their bets by sending decisions to the VR rather than give a try knowing the safety net is not there  to catch an error.

They are quite different and result in different behaviour.

[Superb Chops]

Watched the highlights just now, confirming last night's assumption both no-try calls looked good to me. 

What I only picked up now was how poor Leigh's tackling was for the Field touchdown. Maybe Leigh lost because two defenders failed to halt a slow moving, fairly light player right in front of them with no room for much manoeuvre? 

Harsh considering two teams contributed greatly to a fine watch, but that play was the difference. 

[bobbruce]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

I don't want to be argumentative, but that means they are not the same.

In the NRL, the ref can give an onfield decision of a try with the confidence that the VR will confirm the try or, if they see an issue, stop the clock and make a VR call.

That can't happen in the UK game and so ref's are far more likely to hedge their bets by sending decisions to the VR rather than give a try knowing the safety net is not there  to catch an error.

They are quite different and result in different behaviour.

Sorry I’m obviously not being clear. The discussion started about the process of the VR in this country. Where the ref makes a decision and the VR has to find a reason to over turn it. When I say technically the same it’s this part of it I’m talking about. In the NRL the ref makes the call and the VR ref has to find a reason to overturn it. In both systems the refs opinion is given. How they go about it is completely different but by awarding the try or not the NRL ref is giving his  opinion on what he thought happened. 

[phiggins]

2 hours ago, Superb Chops said:

Watched the highlights just now, confirming last night's assumption both no-try calls looked good to me. 

What I only picked up now was how poor Leigh's tackling was for the Field touchdown. Maybe Leigh lost because two defenders failed to halt a slow moving, fairly light player right in front of them with no room for much manoeuvre? 

Harsh considering two teams contributed greatly to a fine watch, but that play was the difference. 

Both tries Wigan scored were down to poor defence down the right hand side. And I suspect that Leigh will be looking to bring players in to improve on Reynolds, Chamberlain and Briscoe for next season.

But when you have a video ref giving no try for something that he seemingly thinks should be a try, then there will be questions asked on the process.

On the Field no try, he ran through a gap that was made bigger by a defender being blocked. Lucky for Leigh, as he may well have got through the gap anyway, but a correct call imo.