Lots of effort and some good quality but basic errors let us down.

On the plus side some really nice rugby and intensity in defence. Hardaker and Leuluai were great, O'Loughlin had his best game in a while. The forwards were able to compete which was good to see.

Sarginson had a shocker (always seems to take a while to get going after a spell out of the team). The Navarette knock on and Flower penalty were both dumb as was the Hardaker kick to touch. Tautai's marker defence again let us down.

Hicks on the video was atrocious - disallowing a clear Wigan try and allowing Wigan a clear no try. I guess it evened up but terrible refereeing.

Agreed. Hard to be too disappointed just hope we can take the momentum into the next few games. Happy to concentrate on the league and that is not said out of bitterness.

Great cup tie. Wigan gave everything but it wasn’t enough.

Harsh call on the Sarginson no try, although it did hit Tommy’s hand so letter of the law states a knock on, doesn’t it?

Video ref clearly evened it up, the Sarginson try that was given was as clear a double movement as you’re ever likely to see.

It was a much better performance and hopefully showed that the team is now in a place to compete. I thought there were two key team selection decisions in there - one that made us much stronger and one that was a poor decision.

Leuluai moving to halfback was apparently down to Shorrocks picking up an injury but is there anyone who would have wanted Shorrocks in that position? Tommy's defence was outstanding and what he does in attack is take the line on, command the ball and take it to the line before passing. Yes he has his drawbacks but it was such an improvement on what we get from Shorrocks that is made a significant difference.

The one that I couldn't understand was Hankinson on the bench. He's not shown anything that suggests he's a Super League standard player, but if he was there because Sarginson was a risk then it's a poor call - just play Hankinson at centre and cope as best we can. To then have him brought on at second row when he's got nothing to offer there ended up costing us. Morgan Smithies would have been a better bench option. Greenwood going off robbed our left edge of strike power when chasing the game but Smithies would have offered more.

All in all though I thought Wire still had the better team but we edged it in terms of enthusiasm. O'Loughlin was outstanding. Clubb justified his selection by being pretty solid defensively. Tautai still isn't good enough though. Powell had one of his better games but that just highlights one of our big problems, because he was nowhere near as good as Clark.

I think if we can keep this squad fit for when Sammut and Farrell return we'll have good competition for places and two players who could add something to the side.

Yeah, agree with all that. I thought it probably our best performance this season, and stupid errors cost us. But we showed we can go to to toe with the top teams. Disallowed try very harsh (damn this 'looking for a reason not to give it'), but as you say, Sarge's allowed try was a double movement all day long. Someone said to me in the pub, "He had to give that". Well, no, he didn't. Video reffing shouldn't be about evening up previous errors. Don't compound one poor call with another.

Wish we had a Darryl Clark. And once again, for me, although Hardaker had one of his better games for Wigan, Ratchford showed he is the best full-back in SL. And he kicks the goals.

Not sure it was evened up because I’m still stumped how a no try call for Jack Hughes could be turned around on that evidence. I could only see it from the stands though so maybe I’m wrong but it looked like the type of call that had to stay with the on field decision.

Watch it again and you’ll change your mind I’m sure. Hughes clearly grounded the ball.

Plus im sure you cant boot the ball out of someones hands any more

Definitely not if he had connected it could have been an 8 point try

One thing for sure is that he’s certainly not done that. He went to get his boot under him and from the replays in the stadium it looked totally inconclusive if he’d got it down or not. In that case it stays with the decision given by the ref but today that wasn’t the case.

As I say that’s from live viewing in the stadium, so I’ll give it another watch when I get chance and it’ll probably loom totally different.

Not the point, you cant use your foot in that situation to defend the try line, its dangerous.

Don’t be daft. He’s put his foot under the ball, not a kick. Looking for something that isn’t there.

Thought they'd get stuffed today but they played very well indeed. But just how can the video ref make so many glaring errors ? Sarginson 'no try' and then the double movement 'try'. Video ref needs to get to specsavers pronto.

Of course you can try and get your foot/leg under the ball (his attempt took me back to Radlinski stopping Cunningham in the Radlinski final of 2002). He can’t attempt to kick the ball out the hands of the attacker and clearly he didn’t do that.

I said I’ll watch it back and give a view and after just doing so I can see why he’d give it. I don’t think it’s 100% clear it’s been grounded and in that case I thought he’d stick with the refs call. It highlights the flaw with that refs call system IMO. Don’t send it up with any prejudice and nobody bats an eyelid. I’d say it’s a 60/40 call in favour of it being a try but to turn round a refs decision of a no try, it really needs to be a glaring error and you need to be 100% certain it’s a try.

Do you want to go a bit further back to find an example? It got clamped down on within the last ten years, coincidentally when stomkins was sliding in and booting ppl whilst "trying to get his foot underneath"