Some idiot who bought our tickets (my own fault for being lazy) thought it might be funny if they were in the east stand. So there I was surrounded by thousands of Leeds fans......

Anyway, as I watched it right in front of me Cunningham sticking his hand in I thought sh*t you've just allowed them to take the lead, that was stupid and did indeed turn the game. So I agree with you rickyj up to then, but if the offside had been given instead of the try it would have been a penalty to us and down the pitch we would have gone and then who knows, e.g.leeds bottle might have gone

I don't know why you're all whinging. The score was 11 10 at the time of the decision, so you were still losing.

Plus, it sort of makes up for Saints getting away with Chris Joynt's voluntary tackle, doesn't it?

Fair enough, we were. BUT it would have been nice to have seen the game run it's course properly rather than be cut off prematurely.

All Saints would have needed would have been a penalty inside the 40. It's not like we had to score 3 or 4 times in 10 minutes.

Cunningham should have been put in the bin for that pen! It was a stone cold pro foul. ganson gave saints enough 50/50's for there to be no beef. The bentham call was very tight, but was by no means a poor call, but was a 50/50 that went Leeds way?after all the rules say benifit of the doubt should always go with the attacking team. and that is a fact!

Well played both teams! It was a great final

Which is what happens imo. They both go for it, Eastmond touches it first, it then hits Donald and THEN Eastmond gathers it in and races away to score.

Was watching the game with my old man, and as soon as the video played first time, we both called offside. I'm a Quin, he's a Bull.

Odd decision, to say the least but sadly didn't really change the game. Thought you were the dominant side in the first 40, but it went wrong after the drop.

What year did the rule change from "one foot behind the ball" to "both feet behind the kicker"?

Under one of those rules the try was fine.

But which is better? There's only one way to find out! FIGHT!!!

It wasn't a try.

The game wasn't nearly over. It is pathetic to try and make out like the score would have been 12-10. Saints would have gotten a penalty and very probably would have been within range for a drop goal to at least level the scores. Games ebb and flow, 17-10 with 8 minutes to go was always going to be too much to do.

Comparisons with Chris Joynt are rubbish too. I'm not sure there is even a rule about voluntary tackles anymore because it is never ever given. The ref used some common sense that night in not choosing the last minute of a Grand Final to award a strange penalty. Bentham used no such common sense last night.

To award a try like that to decide the result of a season, you have to be 100% certain in my opinion. No benefit of the doubt nonsense.

I agree. It was offside and had Bentham ruled it as such (as he should have done), Leeds would still have been in the lead so his decision would not have in any way been detrimental to their position. How he could have made the decision he did is beyond me.

Stop Whingeing - take the try out and you still lost - made no difference to the outcome - you just wernt good enough - get over it

As I understand it The VR ruling was that Smith was always behind the "ball" so therfore onside ????

Prior to that info I was certain the try would be ruled out as Smith`s back foot on the ground was about an inch in front of McGuires non-kicking foot

If you watch the slo-mo Smith is indeed always behind the ball but I am not sure when this ruling was introduced.

Having said all that I think we were totally dominant at that stage and would still have won the game 12 -10

You lost by sticking to a very very rigid game plan of 6 drives and a bomb which was fine for the first 30 mins but was NEVER going to win you the whole game

When you did at last get the ball wide to the wingers we had the cover to take you out and thats what decided the outcome for me.

Wrong on that one. Had four of our players not had brainfarts at various points in the game, it could have won us the match.

no way was it as clean cut as you are saying. At the game I thought it was off side, but I was a long way from the screen! when i watched it back on sky plus I thought is was tight as you can get, maybe off side maybe not? What I can say is this season I have seen far more blatent no trys given as trys by the video ref than that one last night. some of the things that have been give this season have never been trys in a million years! The rule is the vid ref must give benifit of the doubt to the attacking team, bentham did his job it was too close to 100% rule out the try.

I thought there were times last night when ganson couldnt get the whistle in his mouth quick enough or didn't do what he should have done( Cunningham should have gone in the bin) to help out his beloved saints, maybe just maybe Bentham thought the same and that pushed him towards give Leeds a 50/50 call( which it was)
It's a tough brake and I'm sure you gutted but you can't say beyond reasonable doubt it was definitly a no try.

I was right by the screen and no matter how many times Bentham played it, it was still offside. It might have been a close offside but offside is still offside no matter how close. But as I said, that is not what lost us the game. Four of our players lost us the game with their respective stupid brainfarts.