Let's not blame Klein!!

[Matthew]

Lol well unfortunately long winded rambling will not prevent me from pointing out that you are blinded by club loyalty and thus are biased.

I'll keep this short then!

Rather than going through a tape of the game that I don't have. I will say this.

Do you think that we would have lost if the knock-on by Greenshields (and reported on sporting life) had been given?

Nobody knows. However, what we do know is had Mark Calderwood caught the cross field kick we would have won. You see that is the only certainty as far as the result. Everything else is conjecture.

That's not what I asked! It is possible that had Calderwood caught the ball he could have been penalised for something.

What I am asking is a simple yes or no question:

Do you think that we would have lost if the knock-on by Greenshields had been given?

[cpwigan]

I'll keep this short then!

Rather than going through a tape of the game that I don't have. I will say this.

Do you think that we would have lost if the knock-on by Greenshields (and reported on sporting life) had been given?

Nobody knows. However, what we do know is had Mark Calderwood caught the cross field kick we would have won. You see that is the only certainty as far as the result. Everything else is conjecture.

That's not what I asked! It is possible that had Calderwood caught the ball he could have been penalised for something.

What I am asking is a simple yes or no question:

Do you think that we would have lost if the knock-on by Greenshields had been given?

LoL One I cannot say if Greenshields knocked on. It was a 50/50 call. I cannot predict whether we would win or lose if he did or he did not. I have no mystic powers.

The only YES or NO question/answer is that had Calderwood caught the kick, the hooted would have sounded and we would have won. Yes or No Matthew. Therein lies the reason why you cannot hypothesise on your point. Whose to say we would have retained possession if he did knock on, whose to say Cats would not have intercepteda pass. A 31-30 result last season should make people realise that it is never over until the fat lady sings.

[cpwigan]

Matthew keeps tryping defeatist. Well so far if we accept your views we were somehow robbed v Cats but given Hudds got robbed v us I think the adage is correct. Try replacing defeatist for realist.

How were Hudds robbed? Did the ref give us the means to win the game? I don't recall their coach having a go at the ref whereas ours was not happy with the refs decisions at the end.

Dave you are either

1) A liar
2) Totally biased
3) Ignorant

Huddersfield 19-20 Wigan

Wigan snatched victory with two tries in the last four minutes after looking down and out against Huddersfield.

Kevin Brown's 74th-minute drop goal put the Giants 19-8 ahead but Pat Richards converted tries from Andy Coley and George Carmont to deny them the win.

Huddersfield's misery was compounded when prop Darrell Griffin was sent off after the final whistle for dissent.

Huddersfield coach Jon Sharp:
"I believe an absolute injustice has occurred today. It started in minute one and finished in the 80th.

"I just feel really disappointed with a number of issues which surround the officiating of the game.

"Darrell's red card is probably a reflection of his frustration that epitomised the group's feelings.

"The majority of the penalties were penalties, and I'll be speaking to my team about discipline and about how we handled those closing stages of the game.

"But the inconsistency of the officiating in this game was absolutely appalling.

"We're very proud of our discipline, but the rules changed today. I saw some decisions that were correct but I wouldn't have minded them that way for 80 minutes for both sides."

I suggest you Admit you were wrong and apologise. Are you man enough to do that?

I have just proven you wrong and everybody else has the evidence.

Likewise, not one person, not one fan, not one coach, not one player will say Wigan are playing well. Everybody says jeez we are nowhere near our potential and somehow 2nd. If we found that extra 40% we could render referees irrelevant.

Otherwise we have to accept that over the course of a season decisions will even themselves out and what comes around goes around. We got the win at Huddersfield, we lost to Catalan. If you play superbly then the adage breaks down as a great sportsman once said "the harder I prepare, the better I play, the LUCKIER I seem to get"

I await my apology Dave and you can remove the egg from your face

[cpwigan]

Matthew keeps tryping defeatist. Well so far if we accept your views we were somehow robbed v Cats but given Hudds got robbed v us I think the adage is correct. Try replacing defeatist for realist.

[How were Hudds robbed? Did the ref give us the means to win the game? I don't recall their coach having a go at the ref whereas ours was not happy with the refs decisions at the end.

Dave you are either

1) A liar
2) Totally biased
3) Ignorant

Huddersfield 19-20 Wigan

Wigan snatched victory with two tries in the last four minutes after looking down and out against Huddersfield.

Kevin Brown's 74th-minute drop goal put the Giants 19-8 ahead but Pat Richards converted tries from Andy Coley and George Carmont to deny them the win.

Huddersfield's misery was compounded when prop Darrell Griffin was sent off after the final whistle for dissent.

Huddersfield coach Jon Sharp:
"I believe an absolute injustice has occurred today. It started in minute one and finished in the 80th.

"I just feel really disappointed with a number of issues which surround the officiating of the game.

"Darrell's red card is probably a reflection of his frustration that epitomised the group's feelings.

"The majority of the penalties were penalties, and I'll be speaking to my team about discipline and about how we handled those closing stages of the game.

"But the inconsistency of the officiating in this game was absolutely appalling.

"We're very proud of our discipline, but the rules changed today. I saw some decisions that were correct but I wouldn't have minded them that way for 80 minutes for both sides."

I suggest you Admit you were wrong and apologise. Are you man enough to do that?

I have just proven you wrong and everybody else has the evidence.

Likewise, not one person, not one fan, not one coach, not one player will say Wigan are playing well. Everybody says jeez we are nowhere near our potential and somehow 2nd. If we found that extra 40% we could render referees irrelevant.

Otherwise we have to accept that over the course of a season decisions will even themselves out and what comes around goes around. We got the win at Huddersfield, we lost to Catalan. If you play superbly then the adage breaks down as a great sportsman once said "the harder I prepare, the better I play, the LUCKIER I seem to get"

I await my apology Dave and you can remove the egg from your face

[Matthew]

LoL One I cannot say if Greenshields knocked on. It was a 50/50 call. I cannot predict whether we would win or lose if he did or he did not. I have no mystic powers.

The only YES or NO question/answer is that had Calderwood caught the kick, the hooted would have sounded and we would have won. Yes or No Matthew. Therein lies the reason why you cannot hypothesise on your point. Whose to say we would have retained possession if he did knock on, whose to say Cats would not have intercepteda pass. A 31-30 result last season should make people realise that it is never over until the fat lady sings.

I wasn't looking for a definitive answer - neither was I looking for your clarify 100% on the call for the knock on. I asked you if you think in your opinion that we would have been able to hold on for the win, had the knock on been given. As simple as that.

Neither am I asking you to hypothesize on anything. All I am asking for you to do is answer the question. For all we know a satellite could have fallen on Calderwood, preventing him from catching it and les cats could have scored from that.

[cpwigan]

Matthew if it was a knock on I would expect on the law of averages that Wigan would have retained the ball for a set, kicked it into touch and won. That is conjecture/hypothesis.

If it wasn't a knock on. I would expect on the law of averages that Wigan would be able to defend for a set and stop a team from going from their 20 to our try line. WE DID NOT. I would expect our winger to catch the kick. HE DID NOT.

Nobody knows for definite if it was a knock on. What did Nobby say I need to look at that again. Ditto for me and everybody else I would suggest. You see my initial reaction was at the time. I bet Calderwood was obstructed. I saw the evidence and he was not.

Everybody needs to accept that had Calderwood caught the ball we would have won. That is the only certainty even allowing for meteorites

[DaveO]

Matthew keeps tryping defeatist. Well so far if we accept your views we were somehow robbed v Cats but given Hudds got robbed v us I think the adage is correct. Try replacing defeatist for realist.

How were Hudds robbed? Did the ref give us the means to win the game? I don't recall their coach having a go at the ref whereas ours was not happy with the refs decisions at the end.

Dave you are either

1) A liar
2) Totally biased
3) Ignorant

The above comments are bang out of order.

For a teacher you have a poor grasp of grammar. I said

"I don't recall their coach having a go...."

I guess that makes me a liar does it?

Had I said "Sharp did not have a go" you might have had a point. I suggest you think before you hit the keyboard next time.

Even then you would be playing semantics because I was referring to Sharp complaining about the tries we scored to win the game and given the context of this discussion I thought that was obvious.

I suggest you Admit you were wrong and apologise. Are you man enough to do that?

I have just proven you wrong and everybody else has the evidence.

Their coach was clearly unhappy about the officiating throughout the match. Fair enough. Nobby has been unhappy about the officiating in some of our games as well.

However the point I was making was that those two tries we scored to win that game were NOT the result of a controversial decision by the referee.

Hence my question above "How were Hudds robbed?" and "Did the ref give us the means to win the game?" meaning he didn't give us an incorrect decision enabling us to win it at the death - as Klien did with Les Cats on Friday.

The winning try for Les Cats did follow what WAS a controversial decision.

Am I wrong? Yes or no?

Did sharp complain about the build up to either Wigan try? I don't think he did. Am I wrong?

Did Sharp complain about either try specifically for infringements in the build up to either that were missed by the ref?

I don't think he did.

But I will let you set me right on all the above as I do not recall specific complaints about the build up to either try but if there were complaints, I am sure you will know.

I await my apology Dave and you can remove the egg from your face

I think your are the one with egg on your face due to your choice of language.

Now you know exactly what I was on about - did the ref in the Hudds game make a similar error in the build up to either of the late Wigan tries to let us win the match?

Mind you if he did you will have to explain the relevance to what happened on Friday because as far as I can see there can't be any except perhaps two games were decided by the refs actions not one.

Dave

[cpwigan]

Dave what is it you can never admit you are wrong

Do not sidetrack the discussion

You argued a point. I provided the evidence in black and white to show you were wrong and still you try to deny it.

The only thing bang out of order is you

[cpwigan]

PHIL SAYS: The recruitment of match officials is a vital part of the growth and development of rugby league in this country. Your question focuses on the highest level of Domestic competition, but it is first worth considering the need for referees at junior, amateur and student level. I often think that some of the people on the sidelines at junior and amateur games that I have witnessed, need to go to their doctors.


Why would any sane or reasonable person verbally abuse a man who is giving up his time for free to officiate a match? What do they honestly think that they are achieving by criticising a referee to the point that he stops doing it? I would like to take this opportunity to remind parents/grandparents/guardians etc of the need to show some respect to the referee, even if he gets it completely wrong.


If we look at the specifics of your question though Matt, I would like to disagree. After watching the match very carefully on DVD (with the advantage of being able to pause, rewind and move forward frame by frame) I cannot agree with you. I do not think that the referee gave a victory to the Catalans. Firstly, the Dragons have lost two games this year in the last minute of the match, and have used that experience to make themselves tougher in the closing stages of games, both when they're in front and when they're behind. We should recognise their improvement as a team in Super League, who like Wigan at Huddersfield, were able to score twice in the last five minutes.


I can only guess which decisions that you were referring to and imagine that one was for the last try. Some Wigan fans claim that Calderwood was taken out in the air. In slow-motion that does not seem to be the case. Both Catalans players appear to be in the air attempting to either catch or tap back the ball. Both Croker and Pelo have their eyes on the ball, not on Calderwood.


In the lead-up to Guisset's try, Catalans were awarded a penalty for what appeared to be offside. I don't think that you could claim this gifted a win to the Dragons. The penalty count ended up with Wigan penalised eight times and Catalan nine. There was one incident mid-way through the second half when a Wigan player was dragged over the sideline. However, we'll look at this on Boots 'n All this week and see that the referee was again correct.


Some people have said that I am still a Wigan fan in the commentary box. Perhaps my answer here will demonstrate that I attempt to provide fair, honest and accurate analysis.

Abnybody seen Dave O with his humble pie?

[DaveO]

Dave what is it you can never admit you are wrong

Do not sidetrack the discussion

You argued a point. I provided the evidence in black and white to show you were wrong and still you try to deny it.

No you jumped on the fact I did not remember Sharp throwing a wobbly about the refs performance throughout the whole game and called me a liar etc.

There is just no need for language like that on here and posting that such language is out of order as I did is not sidetracking the discussion.

I am quite clear in what I meant that there was no complaint from Sharp about a decision in the build up to those two ties we scored to win the game at the death whereas there was an issue last Friday.

The fact Sharp was upset about the way the rest of the game was refereed is not relevant.

The only thing bang out of order is you

Well if you think that who am I to argue?

Dave