Look. He has already said, and yet you are all still falling for his wind up. FA is clearly bored or having a quiet week and wants an argument. I'd leave it and he will go away. He is winding you all up, and you are falling for it.

I know he is talking nonsense - you know he is talking nonsense, we all know he is talking nonsense. Let him have his moment in the sun.

You think?

Well probably not. But if they stop arguing with him then he will have nobody left to play with.

The term I used is a colloquialism of the type two normal people might use in a conversational setting such as this. You want me to pay heed only to those terms used in the official laws of the game, and then have us exchange increasingly tedious broadsides of sophistry until one of us, i.e me, walks away bored.

No.

I'm content to know that they've been calling similar incidents in this manner for a few years now. Cummings called it before the official did, we have benefited from similar rulings this season and other teams have had similar incidents ruled in the same way. From what I've seen of the NRL this year it seems pretty standard there too. This more than dispels any notion I might have that we were cheated, treated differently or had something bizarre and unjust fall out of the sky and land on our heads. For me, that's more than good enough.

The situation I originally described is more than adequately accounted for in the rules. If you haven't the wit to understand "shall not encroach within ten metres of an opponent who is waiting for the ball" then there's probably not a great deal increasingly complex arguments about the same simple concept will do for you.

But of course you do understand it, so why we're even having this conversation is the real point of confusion.

You are right it was obviously a try. Have you thought of writing to the RFL and explaining it to them and demanding a replay or the record books be amended. It would be more useful than trying to have the decision reversed on here

But even if we did kick into space, you will always here the referee say "give him 10" before the defender even touches the ball.

Murphy jumped with Kear for the ball, Langley was offside, Langley was within 10m of Murphy and the ball.

However harsh it seems that it was disallowed, those are the rules. We can't have any complaints. Maybe your criticism should be at Langley for going within 10m when he was clearly offside.

We benefitted from a similar call against Leeds, so to say we were done over by the ref when it goes against us is childish.

No complaints from me. I think you're on your own on this one FA.

You know what? We are gonna get pages and pages of folks pointing out obvious stuff to FA, who will play dumb, and we will all go round in circles. Onlookers will look in and think this is somewhat pointless. They would be right.

FA knows exactly what he is doing here and, sadly, he is winning. He's BORED FFS!!! Start an anti-McNamara thread or something - he likes them.

What about a Chris Joynt Voluntary Tackle thread?

I'm not sure if even FA has the stamina to rival that. However the potential for thread drift is always there...

It was not a voluntary tackle and you know it. The ref did not give it. He slipped whilst preparing for the tackle from the Bradfoird player.

When Pumpetypump deleted that thread the club's fortunes nose dived.