I've spoken to loads of Wigan supporters here in Billinge today and all of them say that was definitely a try (albeit they are all telly viewers.). It altered the whole concept of the game they say, you can't play catch-up at Wembley.
I've spoken to loads of Wigan supporters here in Billinge today and all of them say that was definitely a try (albeit they are all telly viewers.). It altered the whole concept of the game they say, you can't play catch-up at Wembley.
Of that there is no doubt, Ralph has been championing the signing of an "ever so slightly off the rocker" second rower for two seasons.
A question to all at the game with a better view of the full pitch, when we had done the hard compression defence and restricted them to less than 30m from their own line, why were our wingers not deeper? Coote could have stopped the chip over, Goodwin and King are not speed merchants, Percy and Naquiama are yards quicker, we had them tight in their 30 yet a booming kick had us on our goal line retreating to collect. First one yes after that we should have read it, if it goes down the middle at the sticks Regan and Tommy have plenty of gas to cover laterally. When he did not get it right Patton then put it straight into touch, not that it mattered we just dropped it anyway.
I thought Hicks and Thaler were awful for both sides having watched the game back but there’s three key decisions there that the two have got wrong that ended in us chasing twelve points at the break.
How he was that sure for Knowles no-try is baffling. He’s almost set off for the twenty metre line before the ball was dead, the first knock-on in the Percival no-try is from Jack Hughes and then was stripped by Murdoch-Masila and the first knock on is from Toby King in the lead up to their first try.
As poor as we were throughout, in those conditions and with the refereeing version of the Chuckle Brothers, it was game over having to chase that twelve points.
St Helens Rugby League Football Club
I thought it was a try when I saw the slow motion replay, but not at normal speed on first viewing. I also thought that Linehams no try was a try, how many did Cunningham score like that? You can't play catch up at Wembley? Give over, lots of teams have come back from being behind, including yourselves in the past.
Not often I agree with pie face but he's bang on. We lost that game not Hicks. Some bad decisions need looking at but that's sport some times those decisions go for you and sometimes they go against you. Warrington were the better side they deserved the win. You don't need to look any further than that, give some credit where it's due
But what you're both missing is it made a huge difference even so early on.
Instead of standing under the sticks waiting for the conversion they're 70m away after a 7 tackle set. I guarentee they're whole game plan revolved around stopping us scoring for as long as possible and it was out of the window straight away.
The Lineham try would not have even gone to Thaler if it wasn't for the Knowles howler. That was 100% done because Hicks knew what he'd done.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Obviously I don't agree it's a weak case Tallacht. The officials made three glaring "errors" not awarding our "try" or even checking with the VR, awarding Wire a scrum deep in our half when the Wire player had knocked the ball in to Grace , it should have been our scrum, and Thaler not awarding our second "try" when Murdoch Massila clearly rips the ball from a Saints player , we collect the loose ball and score. This all resulted in us losing twelve points and gifting Wire six. And as another poster has pointed out, you don't do comebacks at Wembley! I addressed the disallowed Wire "try" as Hicks merely redressing the balance when the damage had been done. What's weak about any of that? We didn't play well, but teams have often not played well and won. It is rather more unusual for teams to overcome decisions made by officials however.
Fair enough Prez if that`s your view but as Rogues has pointed out we have comeback at Wembley.
I do not think we were good enough yesterday for the many highlighted reasons but we are good enough to win the GF.
It will not matter we will win that with a solid game of patience.
I bet our game plan was to stop them scoring for as long as possible too.
Just 1 example I can think of quickly. There wasn't a thread discussing referee decisions when we beat Salford earlier in the year. What if they miss the play offs by 1 point? Theres some things you can and can't control at the end of the day they didn't (in this hypothetical situation) do enough to make the play offs. Same thing applies to us yesterday.
No I'm suggesting it made a huge difference though.
If that try had been given wires next set is starting on their line with Saints flying in at them. Instead the exact opposite happened. I'm not sure I buy your other theory but I do believe Hicks recent "involvement" with Warrington might have influenced his performance
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Buddy I do not think involvement influenced his performance but the decision did make a difference how big is a hypothetical question. I think it was just his arrogance that he had it correct.
Like a boxer, we need to take it out of the judges hands and win the GF comprehensively.
I wonder when the next time Hicks will be refereeing a Saint's game & if it will be at home or will the powers to be let him just meet us again at Old Trafford?
I just hope we are making a forceful representation to Ganson over these decisions. There’s no doubt they had a significant impact in a relatively low scoring game
I don’t know what that will achieve. We have a tiny pool of underpaid (by Rugby Union standards) referees. Some have already claimed that Childs now referees more Championship games than Super League games and I don’t see much scope for Hicks to be demoted.
My view is that we need a root and branch reform of refereeing systems. For quick results, I think that we should just copy the RU video ref system and dump the on field decision as a bad idea. I don’t follow RU but, from what I’ve seen, their top flight refs are better and their video ref system is better. They’ve copied from us in the past and I don’t see anything wrong with copying what they do when it works better.
To avoid the danger of referees being accused of incompetence, arrogance, or being part of some RFL/Sky/BBC conspiracy we need a system where the video ref can quickly point out mistakes or suggest a short delay for a joint review of the recording. If we have video refs we need to use them properly.
To get a better pool of referees, the RFL should look at pay and general terms and conditions. The main point I’m trying to make, however, is that individuals will always make mistakes and we need systems in place to mitigate against that. Perhaps those with more knowledge than me could make some positive suggestions.
Last edited by Suttoner; 26th August 2019 at 09:02. Reason: Funny symbols removed
So you’re saying the RFL fixed it?
Wow, now you come to mention it.... they must have put the butter on Walmsley fingers, injured Lees last week, told Holbrook how to line up and somehow made the weather 30degrees....
I think you’re onto something there..... or maybe just on something?!
Can't stop the spirits when they need you.
This life is more than just a read through.