I imagine Silverwood would have played advantage and told Higham to 'give him 10', assuming Higham does this the ref would have played on, however when Warrington take possession of the ball, Higham is inside the 10m from an offisde position, advantage can't be played so the only ruling has to be a penalty.

He was offside. Feels a bit harsh because it didn't impact he play but offside is offside. Can't grumble.

Did the offside rule always work like this? I'm sure when I used to play it didn't matter if you was offside from a kick unless you attempted a tackle without giving the opposition player 10 yards.

no, just being within the ten is enough,

I know that the issue was if Higham was within the 10 from when a player touched the ball - which he was - but was he more than 10 from where the ball bounced?

I appreciate that according to the rules of the game we was offside - and was largely down to him with Silverwood vehemently pointing to him being in front of the kick - but it does seem very odd to me that this was only because Leeds failed to field the ball. They therefore effectively being 'rewarded' for not diffusing the kick. Surely this can't be right...

That said, full credit to Leeds - and it was lack of respect for the ball that ultimately cost us the game. However, as Leeds themselves proved last season; it's not how you start, but how you finish. Not that we've started poorly whatsoever. Indeed, we have more points now than we did 5 games into last season. It's also totally unrealistic to expect any team to go a whole season withour defeat (not that I'm saying anyone has alluded to this), and losing to Leeds is no disgrace.

I love rugby league, and I love Warrington. So I say roll on next week...

... and C'MON YOU WIRES!!