That's the law. No rule on how far the player has to be, simply that the ball has to be rising. So that's the only issue up for debate - was the ball rising? That Bowen was a couple of metres away is irrelevant.

[url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/rules/official_laws/2_glossaryCharging Down is blocking the path of the ball with hands, arm or body as it rises from an opponent's kick.[/url

At first glance I thought Bowen's was a shoulder charge, but on second viewing looks far more like a body check.

But don't let any of that stop the knee-jerks jerking.

Exactly, it should be a case of watching and deciding "would that defender have gotten there?" Too many of the ones chalked off recently are for defenders who had little to no chance of making a tackle on the ball carrier.

"You've got to take possession before you can pass it" - Richard Silverwood.

When did this become a rule?

I think I heard the ref say it wasn't a shoulder charge because he didn't turn in to lynch. So it was more of a chest charge.

It's not bollox. It's actually common sense. A Cas dummy runner ran ahead of the ball, therefore putting himself offside, and then interfered with play by blocking a defender's path to the ball carrier. If he'd run at the other shoulder of the Wigan defender he then wouldn't have blocked the defender's path to the ball carrier.

It's quite simple really.

It's a stupid one, the fact no further criteria is applied.

I can guarantee they'll be other situations this season when theres a blatant knock on but it fits the current ruling for a charge down, but they'll be no one on here questioning it because......it's a blatant knock on.

This. Bad decision aside that was a great half of Rugby League Football.

Great game and well deserved win for Cas. There will always be contentious decisions which could go either way. There are too many people who bleat on about referees. They will never get everything right. The TV coverage especially sky are partly to blame by focussing so much on 50/50 decisions rather than the skills of the two teams.

it is simple, it isnt obstruction. Rulings for people who know the rules but not the game.

Spot on this. If you need a slow motion replay to see if there was an 'obstruction' it will have had little or no effect on the play. I understand it is the law etc however why has it only been enforced in the last 6 weeks (according to Peacock/Wilkin on TV) and not from the start of the season?

Well yes it is. A Cas player, in front of the ball and so offside, impeded a Wigan defender from getting to the ball carrier.
If that's not obstruction then nothing is. Because that is pretty much the definition of obstruction.

If teams don't want to obstruct it's really quite simple, don't make contact with a defender and don't be in front of the ball. If that means teams have to change how they play then that's just how it is. Dummy runners are supposed to be additional options for the halfback/playmaker, not NFL style blockers.

If it's so simple why is there so much controversy surrounding it?