Being.

Simple. A game of RL is a complex thing, involving the interactions of 34 players, 2 coaching teams of varying numbers, 4 match officials (the above being crudely divided into physical and mental elements), atmospheric condidtions, actions of an unpredictable oval ball and no doubt a few other bits and pieces I can't be bothered to think of now. The outcome is decided by a succession of incidents, of varying moment, some of which may go in one side or another's favour and some of which will have more impact than others.

This, however, is quite difficult to get your head around so it is easier to choose one or two of those interactions and incidents which seemed like they were quite important and imagine that reversing those would have certainly reversed the outcome.

We may be right, we may be wrong. The important thing is never to acknowledge that we'll never really know either way.

Simples.

What you have completely ignored is the fact that the coach picks the team! I'm pretty sure more than the 17 that played put their hand up to play in one of the biggest games of their lives, but that doesn't mean they all play does it! You keep gripping at straws lad!

Calderwood & Walker made a complete meal of the kick that lead to the winner, Bai made..........well we all know that one, Sinfield made a poor "tackle" on Cooke as did Ward.

Only ward out of those would/should have been spelled that day.

Does Radlinski get the same stick from Wigan fans for playing in the 2002 final injured?

Or for playing in slippers. Or so I heard.

Where did I say I was upset.....fancy wanting to express my own opinion on an internet forum etc etc

It helps in a physical contest if all the participants are fully able to make an appropriate contribution - if not one side is at a distinct disadvantage from the off.

Regardless of wether you think it affected the result it was still an act of sheer selfishness that showed very little regard/respect for any of his team mates. I bet he would not have stuck his hand up if it had been an away game at Wigan!!

Simples

Or a burning desire to put his body on the line to play in a big game with those team mates.

Nobody knew whether the ankle would hold up or not, otherwise the doctors would never have let him play. He was our main strike weapon, and if it had worked and he'd played a blinder we wouldn't be having this conversation. That's the nature of gambles. If we had the benefit of hindsight they wouldn't be gambles.

I once again remind you that he didn't pick the team. The coach will have consulted the player and medical staff and taken a calculated risk.

Hang on a minute, I wasn't looking for blame for losing a game. You asked the question, "Can someone explain how Senior lost us the game". Someone responded to you, and like you, mentioned a missed tackle, or a Bai mistake. In other words placing blame elsewhere.

I simply said, why has the fact that Senior not been able to last the game, and therefore the pressure put on to his team mates a man short, and an extremely hot day, been completely ignored? I wasn't blaming or excusing, just asking. So somewhat ironic would you not agree that the response back is to actually going into blame mode, but use other players instead.

The whole Crusaders episode only goes to show how the RFL havent reali got a clue why do we have to have such mediocraty in charge of our game atleast they didnt have to go threw with the shame of kicking Wakey out on the grounds the welsh outfit meet the criteria and Wakey dont

Shame about Keith though think he might go to Widness

Not sure it has been completely ignored per se rather than suggested that the decision to play Senior would have been a carefully calculated risk after discussion at length with medical staff, coaches etc. The worst Senior can be accused of is a desperate desire to play maybe?