WiganWarriorsFans.com

Realistically, it was obstruction. The anonying thing is that has we scored on the next tackle, it would have been given as the refs have a different set of criteria than the video refs for obstruction. For a ref to give obstruction on the field it has to be pretty blatent. The video refs only require a hint of obstruction somewhere just this side of imaginary to rule a try out.

100% Warrior wrote:Could not see what was wrong with it myself, probably a sympathy vote for Stains. I do think if that one had been given then the floodgates may have opened as we'd just hit them with Sam's try minutes before.

Didn't affect the end result though, we're champions!!

I do love saying that.

It did affect the result - we would have won with 30! The scoreline flattered Saints.

I think I was the only Wiganer not dancing when he scored from that effort, sadly i knew it would be taken back and a NT :conf: nice celebrations though from the guys on the pitch

ancientnloyal wrote:I think I was the only Wiganer not dancing when he scored from that effort, sadly i knew it would be taken back and a NT :conf: nice celebrations though from the guys on the pitch

I turned to my dad and said 'no try obstruction' but technically I'm not a Wiganer so you might be right ha

I think obstruction was fair call.

Stupid thing is if Lockers had taken the tackle and there was aquick play the ball we could have scored and Silverwood couldn't have gone back to the incident. If he thought it was an obstruction in the first instance he should have the backbone to say so instead of usin gthe easy option of video ref!!

If Pat hadn't gone off, there were six points to be had without another try.

I wouldn't have given it in truth. Liam, although he puts his arms up to get out the way, he does obstruct Chris Flannery just for a second and that is all it takes just half a second delay in the tackle. I still think that Sean would've got the ball away and Liam have scored mind you...

Its a tough one but if you are taking a literal look at the rules then you have to say "No Try"

I suppose literal is better...if it wasn't decisions would be far more inconsistent than they already are and we'd just end up being more p***ed off....

oh well....

2010 Champions, 2011 Champions AND Challenge Cup Holders??

Definitely no try for me. We'd have scored without the obstruction, but Flannery was definitely impeded illegally from making a tackle.

Loved the players celebration though, and a shame for Liam that he didn't get on the scoresheet.

Overall, I thought the refereeing of the final was good. Would have been far worse with Bentham in the middle. Of course, there were mistakes made - but generally it was good from Silverwood.