I'd also have to ask why we had about 10 players to the left of the play the ball when Goulding was down anyway?

Total lack of composure and concentration time and again.

Probably got a point. But that's neither here nor there, we should have won easily anyway whether the officials were awful or not.

Got to say though the standard of officials need to improve in superleague. I don't necessarily mean the referees although they could improve at times, its more the touch judges and in goal referees. Some look like they should be collecting there pension, others look like they've just rolled out of pub after 10 pints and like today some seem about 12 and would no way make a big decision helping the referee. Surely the quality could be improved.

I've asked that question on a couple of forums. Are you sure? I thought that for head injuries the game had to be stopped, as was the case in the HKR v Bradford game last night, or is it at the refs discretion?

Maybe it's one for refs call on Thursday nights Radio Manchester show.

Hock and lauiki dirtyness would ave been spotted too!

I think the key point is that play is supposed to halt if an injured player is lying prone on the floor and at an unacceptable risk of being trampled by either the attack or defence.

If a player is injured in backplay it's rare that play is stopped. At least from experience.

We played London away (Brentford, IIRC) a good few years ago where we had a player down injured and Silverwood refused to stop play, despite the active play going past him about three times up & down the pitch.

Im sure you have your Wigan goggles on and I have my Widnes goggles on .... but I thought the ref gave you more than he gave us. Some of the penalty decisions left me rather confused thats for sure. Bottom line is the ref doesnt matter, with Tomkins in the team you would of won. Although the young lad you had at full back was great, 2 tries and took a lot of high balls very well.

cmon….. you cant have it both ways!

just had a quick look back to your posts about how good it was seeing that team sheet!

And then after the game ripping it to bits………...

The rule is if the officials deem it a serious injury the game should be stopped now someone not moving for 60 seconds to me is serious

Bad enough Listening to the Radio and you lot Chanting!!
We Are Top Of The League,
Say We Are Top o League.......

Don't embarrass yourself by confidently stating what the laws of the game are without researching them first, at least throw in a "as far as I'm aware" in there. Otherwise someone like me will come and post what the lawbook which is rlfreely downloadable to allrl actually says.

Section 7....



And in the same section, under notes



So, as I said, the referee is obliged to stop play if the prone player on the ground is at risk of further injury by being "in the way", otherwise, stoppages for injured players in back play is entirely at the referee's discretion as far as the laws of the game are concerned.

To be fair, every game would be different if it wasnt on TV.

But thats not the reason you lost today

haha always excuses just admit the better team won. well done widnes see you at hull next week hope u bring a few make a decent atmosphere. unlucky wigan lol

You pie eaters lost fair and square, got what you deserved for treating the opposition with such arrogance. Not that anyone is surprised about that.

When it happens to a player way back on the other side of the field I've rarely seen a ref stop the game. Although it's interesting that the law says...

[i"Treatment to an injured player, by not more than one attendant, may be permitted while play proceeds if, in the opinion of the Referee, such treatment is not likely to interfere with play."[/i

what happens if the player needs treatment by more than one attendant, which was the case in this instance. To me that suggests the game should be stopped.