Tues 6th August : SL : Wigan Warriors v Leigh Leopards KO 20:00 SKY and FREE on SL +

[phiggins]

39 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

I've had the Olympics on. 

Did Wigan snap out of their recent sloppy malaise, or were Leigh undercooked?

They looked burnt rather than undercooked 

[Futtocks]

17 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

Wigan won't score 5 easier tries all year. Leigh really struggled with the short turnaround and Moylan played the first half still carrying a rib injury and was terrified of contact so was waving Wigan through on every line break.

Same turnaround time as Wigan, though.

[LeytherRob]

26 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

Same turnaround time as Wigan, though.

I wasn't trying to claim we were at a disadvantage, only that leigh coped with it much worse.

Edited August 6 by LeytherRob

[Zilla Budgie]

Unfortunately due to the fact that we were playing Wigan (even without Field & French) meant we'd lose. We just can't handle them, the brand that is Wigan RLFC. It's been happening for the last 40 years (apart from that one freak result in 2017), and it will probably continue for a few decades more.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

If the player has lost control of the ball - i.e. separation of the ball from the hand/arm, then it isn't enough to make contact with the ball again, you need to clearly regrip it before grounding.  The player didn't and so the try was chalked off.

Unfortunate but a correct call.

Show me the law that says it has to be re-gripped, downward pressure is all I have ever known.

[Snowys Backside]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Show me the law that says it has to be re-gripped, downward pressure is all I have ever known.

A regathered ball in general play is play on, so should have been given due to the feet it was given in play and it had downward pressure. 
 

Irrespective, this defeat is on the coach I’m afraid. One crooked player who should not have been considered and a game plan so passive in the first half, even Huyton might have been in there at half time with a chance !

Why do all the hard work and not throw caution to the wind ?  Really, really frustrating and it’s always Wigan who don’t have to play well to to simply run through huge gaps all of a sudden

Can someone tell me what Ipape is due to do ?  I would rather him to be blistering for 60 mins than stay on the field for the sake of it doing dummy half passes. It’s not good prep for next season. 

[Cheadle Leyther]

Why did there seem no effort by the club to play this game at international weekend instead of this ludicrous 3 matches in 12 days.

[Andy JG]

11 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

not the same tommy martyn that played for saints in the 90s? a different one?

Tommy Martyn is the father of the Tommy Martyn who played for Saints in the 1990s.

Tommy Martyn snr was an accomplished forward for the Warrington team of the mid to late 1970s. He played for Leigh at the end of his career. 

Tommy Martyn (snr) brother, called Mick Martyn also played for Leigh & GB in the 1950s and 60s and is arguably Leigh's greatest ever player along with John Woods.  

The Martyn family has served RL well.

 

 

[Dunbar]

8 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Show me the law that says it has to be re-gripped, downward pressure is all I have ever known.

Since when did we play the sport based on the laws of the game?

I'm just explaining why the try wasn't given based on the current interpretations, it matters little if it is in the laws and it matters less if we agree with it or not.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

Since when did we play the sport based on the laws of the game?

I'm just explaining why the try wasn't given based on the current interpretations, it matters little if it is in the laws and it matters less if we agree with it or not.

I wasn't arguing with you Dunny, I have seen many occasions where a ball as been fumbled but the hand as come back to contact the ball and took it to the ground with downward pressure, everthing bring equal that should not matter if it happens 2ft above the ground or 2inches as it appeared to do in this case.

But the overriding factor is did Mr Kendall actually see it? If so he gave a try, and Mr Thaler saw reason to dissalow it, so we have two officials with different 'current interpretations' as you put it, yes it does not matter that we agree or not, but it should do if the officials are in conflict.

Last minute Grand Final and it happens, what would you expect the fall out of that to be?

[Snowys Backside]

Fingertip control in such incidents is not regripping of a rugby ball and I have seen tries given with separation with fingertips. 

A rugby ball slam dunked with a hand / forearm and given by the ref should have resulted in not enough evidence to disallow. 

If was 2 mins to go in a GF and Wigan we down by two, Thaler would have cacked himself! 

Anyway, it had no bearing on the game and Leigh need to win basically their last 7 to ensure top 6

[phiggins]

8 minutes ago, Snowys Backside said:

Fingertip control in such incidents is not regripping of a rugby ball and I have seen tries given with separation with fingertips. 

A rugby ball slam dunked with a hand / forearm and given by the ref should have resulted in not enough evidence to disallow. 

If was 2 mins to go in a GF and Wigan we down by two, Thaler would have cacked himself! 

Anyway, it had no bearing on the game and Leigh need to win basically their last 7 to ensure top 6

I don't think Leigh will win more than 4 of the last 7 to be honest. Can't see anything but a defeat at magic weekend, or at home to Warrington, then Saints at home will be a dead rubber.

As for that try. If it was the last minute of a final, the video ref would agonise over it for 10 minutes then go with the onfield decision. Like last year's challenge cup final.

[redjonn]

9 hours ago, Snowys Backside said:

 

Irrespective, this defeat is on the coach I’m afraid. One crooked player who should not have been considered and a game plan so passive in the first half, even Huyton might have been in there at half time with a chance !

Huyton... split me corn flakes milk reading that... that came out of your distance memory...

Having been brought up in Huyton and watched a fair few games me thinks even in jest a slight exaggeration...

[Barry Badrinath]

Made a point last night of not being on my phone whilst watching the game.

 

God, Wilson and mcdermot are a bad pairing, barrie himself is pretty terrible, seems kind of aimless if he's not got tez to riff off.

 

Listening to him waffle about wigan preferring Brad dwyer instead of kruise leeming...jeez.

 

Maybe it's hookers he has the problem with, after him confusing daryl Clark, dann walker and danny williams all playing for warrington this year

[phiggins]

6 hours ago, Cheadle Leyther said:

Why did there seem no effort by the club to play this game at international weekend instead of this ludicrous 3 matches in 12 days.

It's a nonsense that a fixture list is released with one game TBC, and then the game doesn't get arranged in the hope that the current Grand final winners do not reach the Challenge cup final.

An extra week needs to be worked into the calendar.

[Dunbar]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

I wasn't arguing with you Dunny, I have seen many occasions where a ball as been fumbled but the hand as come back to contact the ball and took it to the ground with downward pressure, everthing bring equal that should not matter if it happens 2ft above the ground or 2inches as it appeared to do in this case.

But the overriding factor is did Mr Kendall actually see it? If so he gave a try, and Mr Thaler saw reason to dissalow it, so we have two officials with different 'current interpretations' as you put it, yes it does not matter that we agree or not, but it should do if the officials are in conflict.

Last minute Grand Final and it happens, what would you expect the fall out of that to be?

Yes, apologies if it came across as more confrontational than intended.

Just that these days Rugby League is refereed by interpretations and not laws.  This being a perfect example.

[Dave T]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

I wasn't arguing with you Dunny, I have seen many occasions where a ball as been fumbled but the hand as come back to contact the ball and took it to the ground with downward pressure, everthing bring equal that should not matter if it happens 2ft above the ground or 2inches as it appeared to do in this case.

But the overriding factor is did Mr Kendall actually see it? If so he gave a try, and Mr Thaler saw reason to dissalow it, so we have two officials with different 'current interpretations' as you put it, yes it does not matter that we agree or not, but it should do if the officials are in conflict.

Last minute Grand Final and it happens, what would you expect the fall out of that to be?

Kendall thought it was a clean grounding - the video showed it wasn't. They didn't use different interpretations, I suspect nobody saw it in real time.

FWIW, I don't like the interpretation and I think we should award tries for what we saw there.

[Harry Stottle]

43 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Yes, apologies if it came across as more confrontational than intended.

Just that these days Rugby League is refereed by interpretations and not laws.  This being a perfect example.

No apology nessacary.

As per your second paragraph, that being the case it is no wonder we have so much conflict on decisions. Especially when we have two match officials with different interpretations, the function of the video ref has seemingly changed somewhat since it was originated, then it was just to check if the ball had been grounded correctly - like Stevo's fingertip touch - now they are getting involved in all manner of decisions, in my opinion time to get rid and let's just have one official controlling the proceedings.

 

[Harry Stottle]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Kendall thought it was a clean grounding - the video showed it wasn't. They didn't use different interpretations, I suspect nobody saw it in real time.

FWIW, I don't like the interpretation and I think we should award tries for what we saw there.

Disagree Dave, yes the ball was fumbled but in my opinion he got his hand back on the ball and forced it with downward pressure. So had you been the video ref it would have been disallowed on the evidence, had it been me I would have awarded it, and I hope you don't think that that is the view of a *one eyed fan it categorically isn't.

Totally agree with your last paragraph.

* over the last few months just had synthetic lens replacement in both of my eye's taking out my natural lenses, I can now see as well as at any stage in my life, as confirmed by recent eye tests.

 

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Disagree Dave, yes the ball was fumbled but in my opinion he got his hand back on the ball and forced it with downward pressure. So had you been the video ref it would have been disallowed on the evidence, had it been me I would have awarded it, and I hope you don't think that that is the view of a *one eyed fan it categorically isn't.

Totally agree with your last paragraph.

* over the last few months just had synthetic lens replacement in both of my eye's taking out my natural lenses, I can now see as well as at any stage in my life, as confirmed by recent eye tests.

 

Getting the arm/hand back on it just isn't enough - and every referee knows that. You have to regather it - the VR actually did a very good job of explaining it last night, as much as we both disagree with it.

So under the current interpretation, it was a no-try - and Kendall would absolutely have disallowed it had he seen it - but it was so minor that the naked eye would do well to pick it up (which is part of the reason I don't like disallowing tries like this!).

[Dunbar]

55 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

No apology nessacary.

As per your second paragraph, that being the case it is no wonder we have so much conflict on decisions. Especially when we have two match officials with different interpretations, the function of the video ref has seemingly changed somewhat since it was originated, then it was just to check if the ball had been grounded correctly - like Stevo's fingertip touch - now they are getting involved in all manner of decisions, in my opinion time to get rid and let's just have one official controlling the proceedings.

 

As Dave T says, I don't think the ref and video ref had different interpretations.  Just one saw it on replay and the other didn't see it live.

This is one area where the ref's have been pretty consistent and I think both would have come to the same conclusion based on the video evidence.

[phiggins]

1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

As Dave T says, I don't think the ref and video ref had different interpretations.  Just one saw it on replay and the other didn't see it live.

This is one area where the ref's have been pretty consistent and I think both would have come to the same conclusion based on the video evidence.

No problem with that decision in isolation. It is irritating when I'm pretty sure the same official saw the same blurry screen between hand and ball, and says it means there is not enough evidence to overturn a no try call for the same player a couple of weeks ago. 

I have more of an issue with the yellow card. Who decides on what level of force the secondary contact had? The challenge might have been with force, but that was broken when contact was made with the chest and shoulder, which must surely reduce the force to the head? But we seem to have video referees judging level of force, from slow motion replays. Prime example being the early stages of the Challenge Cup final.

[Leyther_Matt]

9 hours ago, phiggins said:

It's a nonsense that a fixture list is released with one game TBC, and then the game doesn't get arranged in the hope that the current Grand final winners do not reach the Challenge cup final.

An extra week needs to be worked into the calendar.

Wouldn’t have had any issue with us starting a week earlier and effectively being an extra warm up game for Wigan ahead of the WCC.

Not a clue how that would work when the WCC is hosted by the Aussies, mind. 

[Hopie]

25 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Wouldn’t have had any issue with us starting a week earlier and effectively being an extra warm up game for Wigan ahead of the WCC.

Not a clue how that would work when the WCC is hosted by the Aussies, mind. 

WCC teams should enter the cup a round later like the football teams who qualify for Europe, the WCC could then be the same week as a Challenge cup round and there is no disruption.

[JohnM]

10 hours ago, phiggins said:

No problem with that decision in isolation. It is irritating when I'm pretty sure the same official saw the same blurry screen between hand and ball, and says it means there is not enough evidence to overturn a no try call for the same player a couple of weeks ago. 

I have more of an issue with the yellow card. Who decides on what level of force the secondary contact had? The challenge might have been with force, but that was broken when contact was made with the chest and shoulder, which must surely reduce the force to the head? But we seem to have video referees judging level of force, from slow motion replays. Prime example being the early stages of the Challenge Cup final.

https://www.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/news/2022/07/instrumented-mouthguards-to-be-deployed-throughout-rugby-league/