In my experience young lads are taught never to approach the referee, unless he calls you over and yes, they still have to call him sir

It's ok, he will eventually get over losing the game and unless we go for the unprecedented action of scrubbing the result and giving Widnes the 2 points, the result stands.
And, as for the fact that "had the try stood, Widnes would have won, we will never know.
I checked the SL website and it still shows Wakefield as the winners of this game.

On a side note
If Sky start to highlight any contentious decisions, we'll have plenty to watch each week.
Regardless of the no try incident, Widnes should have closed the game out, especially when there was only one set to defend so, whether Betts wants to accept the fact (or not), they only have themselves to blame.

Little tip for you kidda..

Those contentious decision videos you're worried about that show tries given were the attacking player has out jumped the defender. They ain't contentious chicken. Them's real tries on a highlights reel.
Peace n Love.
I'll leave you now as I feel I've balanced up a very one sided thread. It's been a real treat talking with you all.
See you all next time when you're bleating about a decision that's gone against you. I'll be sure to keep in touch.
Good luck with the rest of the season.

So you had (in your mind) a try or two dismissed, big deal

Fact is you would've one that game (undeservedly) had Marsh not got himself sent to the bin.

It also doesn't explain the awful and disgusting comments from Widnes fans regarding Ashley Gibson.

So you had a few decisions against you, so did we.m

In the end, Widnes were just an embarrassment from head to toe last Friday.

I mentioned Carney because he doesn't have a dog in the fight and generally talks sense. He only spotted what a couple of mates did on the night that where there, take what you want out of that. You're No. 22 Whitley was the one in front and No.11 Naughton looked a step or two in front of the kicker as well.

As for Cobb not being aware, no he wasn't, so what. How many times do refs give tries then they're chalked off when the video ref sees them because a player's offside. The whole things is more a reply to you declaring 'If that is handed to the video ref then it's certainly given'. That's why I brought the off side's up because it would have been looked at if the video ref was there.

Anyway, time to move on.