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.

How did Brent Webb not get a red card for a blatent double knees into the back of an opponent?

Having just seen the try on TV ,I can not believe how it was allowed.

as tough is it will be and I'm sure you have no real great feeling to play it over a few times on sky plus but have a good look at it at home! the big screen often lies IMO ( or maybe the little screen does?) Bentham is looking at it on a average sized screen not a ten meter one. it looks very very tight on the tv. I can see why you might think its a no try, but as I said it was a 50/50 call it could have gone either way, Thems the brakes! As in the nrl as in super league for calls like that you might as well flip a coin! As you never know how each ref will give it!

Leeds got the call, it's tomorrows chip papers

like I said, this season I've seen miles worse given and even more dead certs chalked off!

Look, I don't give a toss what you think. I know what I saw and you're bound to think it was fine because you're a Leeds fan. But you will notice that I haven't said that the decision cost us the match. It didn't. Our own stupid mistakes cost us the match.

How did Cunningham not get a sin bin for a blatant pro foul penalty in a try scoring position unders the sticks?

maybe you can ask ganson when he's out round tellins with the saints players on mad Monday

Look I'm not trying to troll you, or wind you up, sorry if it came across like that, I'm just reacting to your comments that you think it was no way a try, when it was far more of a 50/50. I never said I thought it was fine, but I've watched enough rugby in sl and the nrl that I'm savi enough to know those calls go either way week in week out.

your the one with the I know what I saw comments. like it's some injustice. When in reality it's one of those calls you just never know how it's gonna go.