This is all unbelieveable. EVERY TEAM "cheats" as some of you like to put it. For me its not cheating its just breaking the rules. Cheating is something entirely different for me. EG performance enhancing drugs etc.

Every game I suspect sees on average at least 12 penalties. Is that for cheating ? No. Mcguire did what he thought was right for his team at the time. His team won, though I don't think his actions really helped. Truth is Leeds were the team who scored the most points on the day and imo and many others were the best team over 80 mins. Other I am sure can argue the other way. Thats sport for you.

What saddens me is that so many people including the man who seems to think he is the most intelligent sky pundit claim that Mcguire desreved his injury. That is what is so disgraceful about Clarke and others comments. I and many like minded people would never wish injury, especially serious injury on anyone. Its a tough sport which leads to injuries. Its also a livelyhood for every super league player and NL player. To suggest they should get a serious injury for commiting a foul is shocking.

It's amazing how well you know yourself.

You should be proud.

I liked the 'various other trophies' bit personally

One of the most ambiguous answers I've heard in a while

Apart from a couple of s on these boards, I don't recall anyone - and certainly not Clarke - claiming McGuire "deserved" the injury he got, or wishing it upon him. So the suggestion you find so shocking seems to be one you just made up.

surely to suggest it was Karmic retribution is to suggest it was deserved.

It would seem strange for clarke to say "McGuire's injury could well act as a lesson to any other player watching that it doesn't pay to cheat. Perhaps the rugby Gods have punished him for his unsportsmanlike play.."

when what he really meant was "McGuire's injury could well act as a lesson to any other player watching that it doesn't pay to cheat, though you do not deserve an injury if you do so there is a small chance that you may be injured whilst breaking the rules but this chance isnt really any higher than at any other time of the match so it isnt really something you should take into account when making a decision to break the rules or not. Joel Tomkins for instance has broken the rules more than any other player in SL and so far he has escaped serious injury, whilst James Donaldson broke the rules for times and broke a leg so whilst in this rare example there was a corollary between Mcguires breaking of the rules and his injury it would be silly to try and claim causality. Perhaps the rugby Gods have punished him for his unsportsmanlike play. Though the rugby Gods are fallible and in this case would have got the punishment wrong as it was totally undeserved and disproportionate, in which case you do not need to take into account the rugby gods either because their punishment is entirely aribtrary"

And Mr Clarke just expected us guess the rest

Clarke is a joke he must know how biased he sounds,a few weeks backs hemings asked him to sum up how the giants had won the game at wigan, and all the man did was to tell us all how good Wigan was sorry the mans become a joke when it comes to wigan.

The irony of some Leeds fans new avatars.

Anybody know what Mcquire has to say about the incident? Jon Wells is the least bias of the presenters, prehaps he can interview Danny on Boots 'n' all and finally put it all to bed.

"Surely"??

Surely not. Clarke has made a single snappy comment (which you quoted) in a short media article. It is you who is trying to analyse it to death, and try to infer and expand it, and to twist it in such a way that you then claim to know exactly what Clarke meant, all so that you can then have a hissy, self-righteous fit going on to lambast your fake construction.

The POINT being made by Clarke is plainly obvious and clear. It is: "Cheating doesn't pay". Your weird post makes it sound as if you actually think Clarke believes in the existence of "rugby gods". He doesn't. It's a mere turn of phrase, man.

Now let it go.

Quote: boost "Anybody know what Mcquire has to say about the incident? Jon Wells is the least bias of the presenters, prehaps he can interview Danny on Boots 'n' all and finally put it all to bed.'" i assume Danny McGuire has made a few comments to Jamie Peacock: www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/Pe ... 6539544.jp

Quote: boost "Anybody know what Mcquire has to say about the incident? Jon Wells is the least bias of the presenters, prehaps he can interview Danny on Boots 'n' all and finally put it all to bed.'" i assume Danny McGuire has made a few comments to Jamie Peacock: www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/Pe ... 6539544.jp

Peacock shows himself up, then. After the heat of the last minute, having watched McGuire haul down Carmont as he tried to support Richards, arguably costing Wigan the chance of a win, is anyone genuinely even mildly surprised that players nearest to McGuire might have reacted by calling him a cheat?

Then, the claim that by doing this, the Wigan players actually delayed McGuire receiving treatment seems without foundation. If Clarke is to be criticised for his comments, then what about Peacock, claiming the Wigan players were to blame for delay in an injured opponent getting treatment?