Hey it's not my opinion its in the rules of the game in black and white.

If the ball is played quickly, all players will not necessarily have time to retire the prescribed distance. They should be penalised only if they intentionally interfere with play – either actively or passively.

Danny McGuire the dreaded enforcer

How bitter are you - it wasn't even your team that lost!

I have watched it and when Ben Davis plays the ball, Peacock is offside and he is not square (Had plenty of time to get back). On the next PTB, Buderaus is not square and runs round the rook to try to put Chase off. BOTH PENALTIES!!!!

As were all nit picking here, when we went for the drop goal right at the end of the game the one where danny orr charged it down, well he was well offside,penalty to leeds under the sticks, game over

besides this how many times this season would our 2 tries that were disallowed for forward passes, would they have been awarded?

Cas had 2 chances throughout the game one of which chase scored,jones was held up close on your other only chance

Bit silly inviting me to watch the video. Where do you think I got the still from? And there is nothing misleading about it, as can be seen clearly from anyone who wishes to watch the video, neither of the markers were square. Any frame would have shown that.


I'm not sure what you mean here. If the markers aren't square and interfere with play it is a straight-forward penalty. In this instance, both McGuire and Peacock were at fault and both charged at Rangi Chase. Penalty.


Read them yourself, he intentionally interfered with play from an offside position, therefore it's a penalty.

Every time on Sky.

So if I run at an offside player it's no penalty. If he tackles me it's a penalty. What part of that rule are you misunderstanding?

Watch the video - no one ran at or was tackled by the players you're saying weren't square - the ball was passed cleanly away from dummy half. Peacock later joins a tackle (as third man in) but as the rules state "A player who is out of play may again take part in the game when the advantage gained by not retiring has been lost".

If your this upset about a Leeds-Cas game, how bad are you if a decision goes against wigan?

Gutted we lost but some of the posts really are not pointing at why we actually lost this match. In the second half we gave away far too many penalties which took leeds from there own 30 to our 30. This eventually changed the score from 8-2 to 8-8. We have been the same all season giving away penalties from which teams score. Come on Terry surely you must know this and need to drill into certain players jones,ferres,mc oldrick etc that this is going to cost us if not careful a top 8 finish.
Come on the tigers will be their fri to see them give away too many penalties again against Leeds and to be honest I cant see us winning that game either revenge or not. Hope the tigers prove me wrong though.

Is anyone who disagrees with you "upset"?

The Peacock offside would be given in plenty of games. It stands to reason that if there was no advantage to be gained from joining the tackle then he wouldn't have done so. There was only one man in the tackle after all, and it is a pretty bold assumption to say that Cas lost no advantage from a second tackler wrapping up the ball. But even if you ignore that one, the Chase drop-goal attempt was clearly interfered with by 2 players in off-side positions.