It's also a poor decision for players to decide to remonstrate with the referee and not play to the whistle.

I didn't think it should have been a penalty against Hardaker in the lead-up to Wigan's first try...tackling Charnley from marker after Tomkins's great run, Charnley coughed it up, should have been Leeds possession. Wigan scored next set.

Also thought Farrell's pass onto Flower's foot for the try that got Wigan back into the game was a way forward.

Are those the decisions we're talking about?

I thought Thaler let them get away with Murder Mcillorum was always tackling round the head ,they always moved off the mark and finally they wer forever sqwuaking at the official but he only marched them 10 once.
Good job we won the game fair and square through skill and determination.

Too right!

That Ryan Hall try at Wembley last August should never have been awarded.

the pass that put Farrell through the hole was very questionable too.

i did think farrell was extremely good today though; never seen much in him before today

Spot on. I bet Wane gives them the rounds of the kitchen for that. Shocking stuff from Tomkins and Hock, but fantastic stuff from Peacock to exploit the chance.

The forward pass and the knock-on we're poor decisions. The penalty was spot on. O'Loughlin clearly steals the ball 2-on-1. Just because it's near the try line doesn't mean you can do that, regardless of what the BBC commentary team think.

What did you think to the penalty for pulling back Tomkins from a kick, the forward pass from Goulding for Charnley's try, the penalty for interference against Tomkins and the penalty against Hardaker for offside despite being square?
All poor decisions? Or do only poor decisions against Wigan count?

Oh, and I echo Tad's sentiments.

Wigan made just as many forward passes but didn't make anything of them

Thaler just let pretty much everything go around the ruck just as he did in the second England V Exiles match. A penalty count of 4 - 4 in a semi-final appears to be testament to that.

I can't believe those questioning the two on one ball steal by O'Loughlin on Hall it appeared clear-cut and the correct call.

McGuire clearly knocked-on in the move that resulted in Hardaker's second score and while I try to back the referees who make these brave calls I can't understand why they don't use the video referee when he's available.

The best call though I thought was from the video ref on the Hall 'no try.' It was incredibly tight from all angles for leg in touch as the ball is grounded. Back and forth it went with the official trying to come up with a decision. I'm thinking what happens if it's simultaneous? Answer comes 'Fook knows - Double Movement' - classic Ganson.

I got the impression that Ganson was working out the restart - i.e. double movement or was he in touch first.

Excellent performance

We were convinced he was looking for a way to give Benefit of Doubt.

Is it a double movement if the tackling player is in touch, over the line out of play?

Is that what he was working on?

Is it a double movement if the tackling player is in touch, over the line out of play?

Is that what he was working on?

The position of the tackler - in or out of the field of play - is irrelevant.

Hall clearly repositioned the ball after the ball carrying arm had hit the floor. The only thing that could have saved it from being a double movement would be if Charnley had lost contact with him and not completed the tackle, as Hall was still moving.

I can see why the ball steal on Hall was given. If you look at the motion of O'Loughlin's arm and the way the ball comes out, it has all the hallmarks of the ball steal. My first thought on watching it though was that he had attacked Hall's ball carrying arm and not the ball itself, would have to watch it frame by frame to see whether that was right or not.

The Peacock one was a clear forward pass from dummy half, but there are dozens of those that go unpunished in every game, usually due to the referee being at right angles to them and therefore not in a good position to judge and the TJs being fifty yards away and obstructed by other players in the way. That Tomkins and Hock decided to stop playing and wait for the whistle doesn't make it a good decision by the officials, but it compounds what would otherwise have been a fairly straightforward carry by Peacock into a try scoring opportunity which Leeds took well.

The Hardaker second try is just a howler by all concerned. While it's good for referees to back their own judgement at times, given the situation in the game and the potential for it to have touched a Leeds player on the way to Hardaker's hands, either Thaler should have given himself a second to think before making his decision or one of his TJs should have held his ground to bring the possibility up.

As others have said, Leeds got the wrong end of the stick on two potentially game changing decisions in last year's Final. What goes around, comes around.