Richard Shanks:

I have referred to the laws of the game themselves to try to resolve (in my own mind, at least) the issue surrounding the efficacy or otherwise of the decision around the winning try and, indeed, the words that have been used both by Jon Wilkin during Saturday's broadcast and subsequently allegedly confirmed by the RFL.


It would appear to me that the issue is dealt with by the definition of two terms included in the laws Section 2 Glossary.


The first of these is the term "touch down" which is officially defined as : "the INTENTIONAL grounding of the ball by a defending player in their own in-goal" (capitalisation mine)


That then moves you on to having to understand the definition of "grounding the ball" which is officially defined as :-


a) placing the ball on the ground with hand or hands, or:-
b) exerting downward pressure on the ball with hand
or arm, the ball itself being on the ground, or:-
c) dropping on the ball and covering it with the part
of the body above the waist and below the neck, the
ball itself being on the ground.


The combination of those two definitions in no way distinguishes between attacker or defender in the methods of achieving grounding of the ball and to suggest that the laws make such a distinction is disingenuous at best. What's more, you can't interpret a law by removing unilaterally from it one of the three methods specifically provided within it.


The only difference between attacker and defender is the introduction of the concept of intention to the defender's actions, which is a different kettle of fish altogether.


If it is true that the RFL, as reported, have jumped to the defence of the match-day officials by confirming Jon Wilkin's assertion that a defender can not ground a ball with his torso, that begs two questions of them:-


1. Where is the evidence of that by reference to the laws of the game?
2. Why have they not made reference to all the decisions that the match-day officials got wrong (as evidenced by the findings of the MRP today) which, if sanctioned at the time in line with the MRP findings, would have resulted in the issue of yellow and (in the incidence of the alleged spitting incident) red cards, which would inevitably had a significant impact on the outcome of such a tight match? 


I accept that the latter point raises a number of additional and wider issues over the different ways in which match incidents are viewed by the match-day officials (and the role of the video referee is the key one here with his ability to intervene) and the MRP/disciplinary. There was doubtless an intention to keep such a high-profile game 13 v 13 (remember what happened last year with the early sin-binnings of Mike Cooper and Matt Dufty) and on the basis that potentially punishable incident would balance each other out (which they clearly didn't on Saturday to the ultimate benefit of the perpetrators.


Of course, I may be wrong over my reading of the laws of the game and would not be averse to accepting an evidenced rebuttal of the position outlined above, preferably by the RFL or Mr. Wilkin!! 

Wires71:

We would have all accepted the decision in the reciprocal circumstances. 


We should have scored some points in the 2nd half rather than try to defend a 4 point lead. 

sally cinnamon:



I thought we did the right thing, with a lead in the 2nd half against the favourites, forcing repeat set after repeat set. 

Hull KR were in a bad position in the last 20 minutes of that game. Best team in the country but with no silverware yet and facing the mental gremlins of seeing another final slip away, in the pouring rain, and being trapped in a doom loop of being forced to drop out from under their sticks by Sneyd who is relentless at keeping the pressure on.


Most teams would have broken at some point either from the physical or mental pressure and if we'd gone 12-2 up that would have been game over. They are a very good team to survive that. They withstood the pressure and had one opportunity to punish us and they took it. 


Unfortunately we make scoring hard work because we don't have the strike players of old that can finish plays. Imagine that last 20 minutes if Sneyd had the guys around him that Briers did in the final years of his career...Hicks, King, Atkins, Monaghan etc. He'd have been putting kicks to the corner and we'd have swamped them. 

Lord Tony Smith:

Good to see Fitzy and the club are over the result. Back to back cup final defeats and 4 days later that idiot is tweeting about Wolfie being locked up. Beggars belief.

sally cinnamon:

Yes 8 losses from the last 9 finals. In the last 16 years since 2009 we've been to 12 finals, won 4, lost 8, but 3 of the wins were the first three between 2009 and 2012. 


To put that in context, in the 16 years before 2009 we made one final (Regal Trophy in 95) and lost. 


Our haul of 4 trophies since 2009 is the best outside the big three of Wigan, Saints and Leeds. Hull have 2; Catalans, Leigh and Hull KR have 1 each. That stat actually holds until you go back to 2000 since when Bradford have 5. 


So for sure we have been one of the more relevant and competitive teams over the past two decades.


The frustration is that trophy tally could have looked much healthier because there were a few "if onlys"...


2013 GF v Wigan we probably would have won had we not been screwed by Joel Monaghan and Ratchford getting injured 
2016 CCF v Hull felt like we were the better team, we paid the price for not putting them away when we were ahead
2018 CCF v Catalans we didn't turn up in the first half, loss of concentration in the minutes before half time let them put us away
2025 CCF v Hull KR although we were the underdogs it felt like we were the better team and same happened as in 2016


In the other 4 finals we were beaten by the better team. 2012 GF v Leeds we were at our absolute peak but Leeds were still in a historic run, that was their 5th win in 6 years. 2016 and 2018 GFs v Wigan it didn't feel like we were facing an all time great Wigan team by any means but it was a very well coached one with excellent young players. 2024 CCF v Wigan we never really looked like we'd win.