That's a shame because I generally like Burrow, but nobody likes sour grapes. Maybe your classy coach is rubbing off on him?

This is what Wigan do very well by creating an obstruction in there favour, they did it quite a lot last season. They also milk situations when the ref has got his "eye off the ball", example was Micky Mc playing the ball into Wilkins face with his shins who was down on the floor with a blood head injury, think that was Silverwood, who only saw an "interference" play the ball and penalised the injured player.
We see a lot of instances where all players make false claims and the referee is forced into making a judgement which results in inconsistencies, smart play or a con play, depending which side you are on?

From a neutral perspective, McDermott has a lot more tact about him than the Great Ape of Lancashire.

Except he explained the 2014 interpretation, not the 2015 one.

Not much point having a supposed expert on the laws of the game sat in the commentary box if he doesn't even bother to keep his own understanding of them up to date.

Indeed he did

Because everyone on here is familiar with the rules, right? Tomkins was…

Spot on.

The system is a mess.

Also, had McGuire been tackled short and Leeds scored on the next play that would have been fine even though silverwood thought there was an obstruction

It's a tight one, but you can't run behind your man that close to the defensive line and Watkins was already well in front of Singleton when he got the ball. It's close enough that I can understand why you'd be livid but it was the right decision.

Exactly. I reckon if he sent it upstairs as a try then the VR would've given it. That he took so long makes me think he didn't agree with the call as he could've said no try much sooner but probably didn't think is was and would've liked to have give it. The VR is now doing his job with one arm tied behind his back essentially as they seem forced to go with the on field decision unless 100% clear otherwise. Don't know what the numbers are but I've not seen many decisions reversed this year. Two Hudds tries vs Cas were sent up as tries that wouldn't have been awarded under the old system or if they'd been sent up as no tries....but they were sent up as tries and thus stuck with that decision.

Go back to the old system of just sending it up to the VR without an on-field decision, was much better IMO. You still got iffy calls last year because of the controversy around obstruction but at least they were making the decision they think is correct, not siding with the on field ref because they felt they had to.

If you can get away with it then why not? Every team does it.

Ahh, the Wigan motto.

For the umpteenth time for the hard of understanding, it doesn't matter where he runs if no defender is impeded.

Joel Tompkins was not impeded, despite his Oscar worthy performance to pretend he was. Therefore it's not obstruction.

Always helps if you understand the laws you're trying to apply.

I'd go back to the old system with one caveat, the ref should have to specify what he wants checking. One of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen was last year when Leeds scored a stunning last play try which the ref (poss silverwood) referred saying "is there any reason not to allow this", leading to the VR checking back through about 20 passes before deciding to disallow the try on a marginal call

It would have been awarded by the VR if no player was impeeded then surely? Oh what's that? You're a biased c**t who doesn't know what he's talking about? Thought so shhhhhhhh!

Also there's no P in Tomkins you absolute spazmoid!

Classy response that.

Guess the school holidays have started some places.

I'd also add that they need to check defensive team offences once no try is given as a team that was offside (like Wigan last night) shouldn't get a penalty after a no try (first offence and all that)