Attacking side gets the benefit of the doubt at the end of the day and it cant be classed as a knock on because while the ball was in the air Watts touched and carried on touching the ball until it was grounded. Yes it was minimal, I am pretty sure Watts knew very little about it and like most people the rule needs solidifying so that it is never to create this debate again.

I've watched the game twice since last week and on countless times both sides play of the ball was the same as how Watts did for the Murrell try. However if this had been picked up the penalty would still surely have gone to Rovers for not more than one Cas player being onside to the laws of the game. The first offence was the offside then the incorrect play the ball.

Personally I wouldnt have given one Ainscough try due to a forward pass but the one just before half time I think too should have been benefit of the doubt due to not being able to see the line and the ruling states anywhere above the waiste and below the neck is classed as a try if connected with the ball on or over the line.

The game now is about milimeters not inches and with deeper annalysis of the game due to the video ref and more officials we are possibly becomming too critical. If the game was not on TV I doubt the Watts try would have been given, I do think Ainscough would have been given 4 tries. However it was on TV, Ganson went by the laws of the game and it turned out to be the winner that caused major debate.

Cas in some ways just need to settle themselves down and do what they do well more often like taking the ball accross pitch and score out wide. It works regularly so why try and muscle it down the middle?

Possibly due to the fact that our conversion rate from out wide isn't that great and arguably was an additional factor in our defeat last Saturday.

No because winning CHEAP like that is embarrassing and I'd hate to win a game like that and Morgan saying it was character not luck just shows how classless he is.

I'd rather win cheap and classless than lose galantly I am afraid - whether we like it or not it is a results business, not a popularity contest.

I suspect you're post was tongue in cheek.

Trust me, it wasn't.

Nope, not at all I'd rather lose then win cheap in all honesty.

I wouldn't worry, we never seem to be lucky enough to get cheap wins anyway.

I have to agree luck does come into it bonzo.

The true fact is we are simply not good enough.

To papaphrase, the better you are the luckier you get.

I beg to differ as that would undoubtedly have left us bottom of the pile last season. I think the thing we were luckiest with last season was having relatively few injuries, other than that it was very rare that lady luck shone on us.

The problem for you guys is that your grand final the first game of the season has obviously taken it out of you

You see, that might have been more funnier if you hadn't lost to Wakefield and scraped by Salford and Crusaders with two disappointing performances.

Isn't coming back from 10points(1st half) and 8 points(2nd half) showing character?

Yeah but Leeds did look a different beast against Melbourne and only poor finishing and seniors big gob stopped Leeds winning! Leeds also just put 62 on quins in sublime style! have you seen those trys? Wow! Yeah they had alot of injuries did quins, but Leeds had 5 first teamers out all who have played in the last 3 gf's appart from the new Aussie centre delaney. Leeds gave a debut to another academy player tom bush who scored and a home debut to jay pitts.

But in all honesty it must disgust you lot that they can put the one off effort in every blue moon especially when they play Leeds but fall to peaces in defence more often than not!

no pride in thd shirt! or the club or one of the greatest rugby league towns on earth which cas is. And thats from a Leeds fan