Again with the "Eddie hates Warrington" talk
Not one person has mentioned that in the post match talk between him, Stevo, and Clarke, he said that Warrington have played the best rugby over the past 6 months and are the most deserving team to be in the grand final.

Anyway, I think the two controversial tries went the right way as far as the rules go, but for me the one I think we really got away with was our first try.
I was convinced it wouldn't be given once it went to the video ref, and even though he was checking for obstruction, he also checked the grounding and maybe it's just my eyes, but Gidley initially touches the ball down short of the goal line and then he and the ball bounce back up from the turf and momentum take him beyond the line but by then the Saints player had got underneath the ball and the ball never touched the turf again.
So for me I think we were lucky with our first try as I don't think the ball ever touches the turf on or beyond the line.

The two controversial tries, whilst I understand the controversy were correct in my mind.
Even if they go up to the video ref for Linehams try, they would have given a try on the field and there was no conclusive evidence that after the ball came loose that it ever touches the ground without either Linehams hand or torso in contact.

Saints try was unlucky for them, because if the ref gives try on the field it would have stood because there just wasn't evidence either way.
You can clearly see that the ball is just above the line and can only conclude that it would have touched it, but you never actually see, so you don't know if a Wire player got their hand under it or if somehow it doesn't touch.
In that scenario, the only option is for the call on the field to stand.
Harsh, but right.

But yeah, I am still amazed that the grounding for the Gidley try wasn't examined further.

I watched the highlights on BBC & imo there is no way Lineham could have got back to his feet so quickly & still be in possession of the ball if he had lost the ball while scoring the try. The ref & touch judge were close enough to see everything without going to the screen. Gidley was carried over the line by momentum to score his try & once again the ref was in the right place.
As for the Peyroux effort, from what i saw in the highlights the ball may have been touched down legitimately, but whether anything happened previously i didn't see a recording of that.
If anything is causing problems it is the Video rules that the RFL & all the clubs have agreed to.

Personally. I couldn't care less if all 3 of our tries should have been disallowed. I've lost count of the number of times Sts. have beaten us with tries that should have been disallowed. Mainly from forward passes.

The Lineham decision is absolutely correct, it may have been a bit messy but he never fully lost the ball so it's nothing more than sour grapes. I do have sympathy with the payroux try and agree that he scored and whatever the rules it should have been awarded. I don't really understand the mass issue though all it would have meant was that they lost by 2 rather than 8 and if we are nit picking for justice then take 2 off for the Walmsley dive penalty.

They've had plenty of decisions against us on the past, I know I have felt like they must do now on many occasions, narrow defeat after narrow defeat and especially the 3 tries in the last 10 mins when poundland Jack Black got the winner. The reality is that we just weren't good enough and on Thursday the shoe was on the other foot.

All three were tries and I include Peyroux.

Let's move on and win the GF.

I've never had a problem with Saints the club or the team. I've never been able to muster up any hatred to them in the same way I hate Wigan and Widnes.

Their fans however are the most annoying in Rugby; Smug, arrogant and idiotic.*

[size
*In general. I have some good friends who support Saints and they're OK[/size