Can't quite remember off the top of my head, hence why I put it.

There was Youngquests x 2, Mathers and probably one more that I've forgotten - either way, the scoreline could have been much worse for Wakey.

yep u r!

yes it could but they were all disallowed!! also how did mcgoldrick stay on? wonder if u were proud of his tackle on hendo? u should have been down to 12..rangi chase was fantastic and if you lose him next year then you will be in trouble..as for mathers pathetic attempt to claim the try all the best in the play offs tho, i hope u get there.

Aye probably it's just you cannot remember as you say the scoreline could have been worse, it could also have been better had the linesman seen Owen's foot in touch before he fell onto semi's arm and if Silverwood had noticed that the cas player must have knocked on when he reefed the ball out of our full back's hands, but he didn't and cas scored from both incidents its the same sort of stuff you are moaning about really, but a win is a win and you should just accept it as that, what should have happened or did not happen is academic you won and deservedly so, what's your problem?

We did. After all, foul play takes precedence and the two things happend within a second or so of eachother. It was a bad shot by Tadulala and deserved a penalty, despite that idiot Clarke saying "He fell into him!" Tadulala's swinging, stiff arm (denoted by the clenched fist) suggested otherwise.

Since when was the ball going backwards a knock-on? He ripped it backwards, it moved backwards, no problem.

I don't think Wakey fans can be disgruntled with the officials - Kear says you didn't get the rub of green. Fair enough, you didn't for about ten minutes; you did for the other 70 with unpunished laying on in the tackle, facials and elbows on the floor, etc.

There was however one glaring inconsistency, that being the penalty that gave you the 30-28 lead. I've absolutely no issue with the penalty being awarded - it was daft (by McGoldrick again) and a clear penalty. The issue is that interference with the first marker wasn't dealt with at all during the game and Cas were subjected to it two or three times per set every time Wakey were in posession. If we're going to punish these things and try and clean up the scrappy ruck (the current disease of Super League) then let's be consistent about it and deal with it from the kick off, rather than letting it escalate to a point where it might decide a game in the last ten minutes through frustration and stupidity.

Get a seat belt!

This is more like it, a bit of banter over a game makes a change from PP and Stadiums, strange though its almost the same posters offering biased opinions.

Nowt changes does it.

I am pretty sure having watched the game back that neither team has much to be proud of. There were a couple of decisions went against Wakey, but then again there were a few things that I would have ruled in Cas favour - for instance the Mathers "try".

It wasnt a try but I would have said that when the Wakey player deliberately makes a play for the ball (rightly) in that scenario to save a try, becuase without that intervention Mathers would have scored..... But in my view the Wakey arm grounded the ball oiver the line, saved a try but should have been a drop out - in my view.

The main thing I will say, and those who read my stuff should know I am rarely biased or one-eyed I try to be objective - is that when a back rower wanders over the line without a hand on him in the back row channel not in the corner, with a winger and a centre still outside him unused...... then that is not a ref call or a rub of the green issue, that is rank bad defence, that try was the game winner.

I thought Wakey played pretty well and got off to a dream start - Cas, started bad and found a way, but we haven't showed any of our early season form since Easter...... it says 2 points in the paper and thats all that was gained from this. Wakey didn't lose anything on Saturday, realistically even if they had won, it wouldnt have changed much - Wakey eyes are on 2012 already and good luck to them for having something positive to look forward to, it has been a dark year in Wakey.

I notice that you have failed to mention the 4 disallowed tries which due to the technology available proved that the officials got it right every time even the one Wakey had chalked off, and also when Owen's foot was clearly in touch before he head butted Tadulala's arm which they missed, so I am mystified why you have highlighted an incident that clearly see's him knock the ball down, if a player is facing the opposition try line and knocks the ball
down then as shown on TV it confirms it then I cannot see the point of your argument, as I said to fully its all ifs and buts this splitting hair stuff the officials are never going to have the perfect game, they came good for us with the disallowed tries but failed to spot the 2 important infringements which could have altered the game, we lost you were the better team and won on merit, and my point to fully was why not just accept it instead of trying to make out it was easier than it actually was.

Class,real class,were you ever in special school?

Feck me what a thread. I'm really puzzled as to why I bother with these forums any more. Some of the arguments some people make are an absolute embarrassment to the human race.