Thought it was only me in the whole RL community that saw this.

Warrington won the battle, but the war is still far from over. Never read so much rubbish as in this thread.

Regarding the briers incident, taking into account all the factors he should end up with a match ban, but wouldn't be at all suprised to see him get off with a fine. The RFL disciplinary has form for worming out of banning players for big semi's and finals, and it's happened with many players over the years including leeds. Someone with briers record, it'll probably be a slap on the wrist and a bag of sweets.

The incident had little impact on the result. Warringtons pack dominated leeds giving monoghan and briers the platform to pick off the defence with great effect. It reminded me of warringtons CC win over huddersfield earlier this season. In those conditions when warrington are on it they are very difficult to stop.

I wonder how different the dynamics of the game would have been had it been played on the thursday night in the rain.

Warrington are now the bookies favourites to win the grand final, with a week off and another home tie they will be difficult to stop. Should huddersfield and leeds bounce back the club call then becomes very interesting. Who would you like warrington to pick?

If leeds bounce back next week it would be fatal to underestimate them. They have overcome worse defeats and odds many times before in knockout playoff rugby and being able to put 20 points on warrington despite being dominated will be a positive to take out of the defeat.

But then pick hudds, your b*tches, you are sending out a dangerous message. If Hudds lose it will be easy, pick hull. If leeds lose and hudds win, again, very tricky. Saints are lower ranked but are looking very dangerous.

Warrington are in a good position but theres still alot of danger in the circumstances as well. A week off hasn't done teams much good on many occasions in this playoff format. In 2010 leeds suffered. In 2011 warrington suffered. In 2012 wigan suffered. One team often get's caught out by it each season, and bar the 2009 final where both finalists had a week off, the team that haa played each week has won the final.

Cheers for that Flex.

Quite agree Leeds had their fair share of favourable calls which were not highlighted by the idiots commentating.
In the first couple of minutes JJB delibrately tripped Waterhouse in the free play - always thought that was a straight red?



Carvell left his knee in, in retaliation for Maguire elbowing him in the chops with his ball carrying arm, missed by the officials.



Harrison was reacting to Bailey's sly punch to Ratchford's head in the initial tackle again missed by the officials. How M Monaghan never got a penalty for being pushed over on the Leeds try line I will never know.

All these incidents are the norm in any game of Rugby League, sometimes the officials see them, sometimes they don't, that is the nature of sport. I know some are not bothered by the Sky team but yesterday they really did plunge to new depths. Rugby League in this country is currently going through a rocky patch and I'm affraid Eddie and Stevo are doing nothing to help with their embarrassing commentary, always focusing on the negative aspects of the game instead of the positives.
You only have to watch a televised NRL game as a comparison to really see how bad they are. Over there the Briers incident would have been laughed off (literally) and forgotten about after 2 minutes.

Sky have done a great job over the years supporting Rugby League and their visual coverage is far superior to the BBC....if only they could get rid of those two muppets.....

check out this belter from on the rhinos board

looks like it's from Wayne, aged 12.

Excellent win for us. I feel we were lucky that almost every one of our try's was scored no more than 10 metres either side of the posts though as Ratchford in my opinion would have missed a few goals and given Leeds a bit more belief to pull it back.

The contentious issues all went the wrong way imo. I'd have never admitted it while watching the game but Briers should have gone for that. I think Sinfield's try was ridiculous to be given with that forward pass, and the bloody commentators were trying to justify a pass being thrown on a white line and ending up 5 metres ahead of the line as it going backwards!? Westwood's was probably the right decision, benefit of the doubt.

Very confident now, looking increasingly likely we'll be picking one of Huddersfield and Hull, seeing us do that to Leeds, we SHOULD have no problem against either of those teams, but you never know.

No you are wrong.

It is perfectly possible for the ball to travel 5 yards forward and still be a legal pass.

It depends upon the initial direction of the ball relative to the person who passed it. If that person is travelling fast enough, then the ball could go forward (relative to the ground) from the point at which is was thrown and still be a legal pass.

the first pass was ok, the second one, was not.

Last time we had the club call we effectively refused to participate.

We were the only club to abstain from the last vote to retain it (Saints voted against it I believe.)

Tony has been vocal about his dislike of the concept. I'm fairly sure he said there was no point as we would always pick the lowest ranked team.

Depending how this weekend pans out it will be interesting to see if he changes his mind.

Put whatever spin on it you like, it was forward. Ball passed on the white line. Ball caught 5 metres after white line. Regardless of the way in which the ball was let go, it definitely did not travel backwards, and that is a fact. Lee Briers later on in the game threw the ball backwards over his own head and it was given as a knock on! But that pass went backwards? Absolute tosh.

interestingly, that briers 'knock on', he actually passed the ball backwards, and went backwards off the torso of Watkins, so how the hell he gave a knock on, is somewhat amazing.

Having watched in patches your first half, my first reaction was that Briers should have walked. But that is now a matter for the disciplinary committee.

If I were a Wire fan I wouldn't let one moment of madness from Briers take the gloss off what turned out to be a dominant display, and most certainly a Statement of Intent that you mean business this Play-off Series

This may have been stated already but, I'm watching through the game again and Ablett was looking straight at Briers when the punch was thrown so all the Leeds fans can quit with the accusations of punching a man while his back is turned. Ablett turned his head to avoid the shot.

Secondly, although he didn't throw a punch himself, is everyone missing Bailey running in and scragging Briers? He did this after the punch had been thrown, Ablett was walking off and Chris Hill was pulling Briers away. So why did he get involved??

I don't condone Briers actions, but lets look at the facts rather than what people want to see.

I also agree with a poster on the virtual terrace I think, at the play when Hill kicks to Riley's wing (about 17 mins in), Ablett had been in Briers face and there had been a bit of a scuffle on the floor that was out of shot. So, again to put the Whinos fans in the picture, the punch minutes later was not unprovoked.

I'm pretty sure Bailey played the full eighty. His stats show 6 hit ups for a total of 19m. Pathetic for the 3rd prop.