My impression was there were a lot of late 3rd man flops from Saints but as no one else has mentioned it maybe it was my P ‘n B specs!

What about the Walmsley shoulder charge that wasn't given also or does that not fit the narrative of the the whole world being against Saints?

they have done that and got away with it for the last couple of seasons

The officials haven't been great for a long time, it's not gonna change so lets just leave it at that. It's the same conversations about the same things every year

I posted a congratulations post on here and have been enjoying the sunshine since. I should take it as a compliment that you're complaining that I've not posted since Saturday I guess

As for the other allegations, can I just clarify that I've not sent anyone death threats. My tweet was a jokey reference to the PR spin they did midweek about his death threat from the Warrington fan, nothing more sinister than that. I thought putting the 'kindly worded' bit would make that clear but obviously through the cold anonymity of a tweet a few people didn't understand the reference as they haven't got the intelligence to or hadn't seen the piece on Hicks. Perhaps a winking emoji might have helped as well, but I guess I've learned my lesson. I've had several 60 year olds who shouldn't be allowed near the internet hounding me all weekend and one of them threatening to poison my dogs as she knows where I live and they bark too loudly and smell bizarrely enough (I don't have dogs).

My thoughs on the game haven't changed. You were brilliant and deserved to win. We were awful and thoroughly deserved to lose. Hicks panicked and blew his day in the sunshine and that should cost him the Grand Final gig. I think it's clear the standard of the officials is grating everyone and whilst everything is hilarious because you won on Saturday, if you lost the Grand Final to Saints or Wigan after Hicks didn't refer a clear Wire try upstairs you'd be exactly the same. Sam Tomkins not getting sent off is still mentioned bi-weekly at kids football training for example, as this one will be on the parks and fields of St Helens for the next 12 years until we reach another final.

Peace chaps, I'll be back to discuss our mental frailties as we get near the play offs. First got to see if we can become the first club to break a 120 odd year old record for league performance and still end the season with no trophies.

He did everything but panic. He gave what he saw, which was a knock-on by Knowles, and got on with the game.

To panic would have been to go to the screen when he had the best view in the ground. And to be fair since Knowles didn't even claim a try he had no reason to.

Slight correction here. Absolutely nothing wrong with a wall of obstruction provided those players get there before the attackers. As long as they don't deliberately move to block the run of the attacker it's fine. If they get there first and just stand there it's good defending. As it is when defenders run slowly towards the catcher, as long as they don't look where the attackers are and block them it's fine. Obviously, normal rules about obstruction then kick in when the player catches the ball, if he uses the shield to dodge the chasers or runs into them stopping a chaser tackling him then it would be a penalty.

I don't agree. Wilkin summarised that well, he's trying to show he's assertive and confident and just messed it up. I think he's trying to reference that by sending Lineham's upstairs, he didn't want to be blamed. His approach was clearly to have an open, attractive final with as few penalties as possible, which is admirable, but he allowed some truly blatant stuff to go on and had little control over the game generally. A good referee clamps down on the obvious stuff that has an impact on the game and ignores the stuff that has no impact on how the play develops. I'm not suggesting that caused the outcome BTW, I've already said you thoroughly deserved the win.

I would have been annoyed if we were on the end of that decision but saints had enough on that pitch to win that game regardless of that decision.
Saints were over playing from kick off. They were trying to do everything at 100mph and trying to score every time they had the ball. On the other hand most of our sets we just wanted to get to the kick and chase it. We were quite happy to concede metres as long as our line was intact.
I suspect there will be calls for teams to be able to refer a decision upstairs rather than rely on the ref to send it to the VR.

That or borrow from VAR. Although football's implementation of that is terrible, a similar system where the video referee can press a button which puts a red light up somewhere in the ground and just holds up the restart until he's checked it could be used. There doesn't have to be anything on the screen to stir up the crowd, just let the video ref check it. If he thinks there's reasonable grounds for a review, he instantly presses to do that. He doesnt' review the whole thing while the game is held up.

Having said that it really doesn't matter what system they use, they will still mess it up. I'd have given Knowles' try and I'd have given Lineham's. The worst decision of the whole day though for me was giving Warrington the scrum when Percival scores. I can take the video ref not overruling the knock on decision, but there is a clear touch onto Taia in the first place by Warrington, yet you got the scrum.

Saddened who are you trying to fool with your try bollox...if that's a try then we may as well cross the try line and throw the ball downwards like yanky footy you lot know it weren't a try..just like the 3 yards pass at our gaff weren't a try..linehams try that was chalked is very dubious..end of day you had it shoved up you take it and stop crying...remember its always our year...

I'm not crying, I've said all along you deserved your win. Have some class like others on here. Even the Duck hasn't hit me with a 'told you so' yet.

I remember two bits of foul play in the match - the forearm smash by Makinson on Clark and the swinging arm by Taia on Toby King in the last ten minutes.

Indeed, Hicks was clear in his own mind that it wasn’t a try and gave the decision.

So why would he want to send it upstairs?

By the same argument Hicks was clear in his own mind that Philbin, BMM, Fages, and Clark had scored tries so awarded them.

In both cases Hicks was clear in his own mind and therefore had no need to go to video.

When he was unclear in his mind he went to video

Good examples, there were shoulder charges as well. I'm more on about the general policing of the ruck and offisides rather than violent play, it was all just ignored all game in the hope of having an open game.