Quote: mikej "And to clarify once again.......at the time of the ORIGINAL knock-on, deemed to have been by Brett Hodgson, Warrington had the ball and therefore, as for as the video screen is concerned, Leeds were the defense.
Again, confusion would have been averted with "Scrum Leeds". The issue many fans had AT THE TIME was that the Leeds player was seen to knock it on, the Leeds player collecting it was offside so why did Leeds get the feed? I dont think anybody in the ground at the time thought that Brett "knocked on". Further review of the evidence....(ie, I watched the game again, will never get tired of that) you have to view it that Brett released the ball and it hit a player coming from in front of him (albeit that player was actually on top of him). In those circumstances, the ball hitting the Leeds player and then going forwards (from a Leeds POV) would NOT have been called intentional knock-on. It was the clear swing of his hand for the ball to knock it away
when they all ended up on the floor.
My reaction on the day......"HTF has he given it that way?". Now....."good call Mr VideoRef/Silverwood"'"
And to clarify to you once again, the term attack and defence is NOT determined by possession of the ball but territorial advantage.
Warrington were in possession but ten yards from their line and were therefore defending.
HTH