You've just made that up haven't you ?

The worry for me about the game is the validation of the cheap shot merchant by the disciplinary panel.

Westwood injured Green, got a token 1 game, friendly, ban.
He knew the GF, last game of the season and a ban would be served by a friendly. Worth the risk therefore to injure a player and reduce the oppositions chances of winning.
Masoe head shot on Gelling was no attempt to tackle but to injure the Wigan player. The disip don't do anything.
Hohaia knew when chasing Flower to cheap shot him that any ban would be derisory and he will start next season.
Funny how there's no disciplinary matter or cheap shots in the two Final Eliminators, the games before the GF. A one match ban and the GF would be missed

It is mate. But you had the audacity to beat Wigan in the cup this year so you're now on their "naughty list" and can expect to be dragged in to any conversations at totally irrelevant times!
Warrington and Saints are long standing members of the list and you'll have a job to find a thread on this forum where one or the other or in most instances both are not implicated at some stage

Perhaps that's because since and before the times of Les Boyd and Sonny Nuckle both clubs have had their resident thug.
Saints beat us in a final, they've done it before and we have beaten them in plenty finals too.
Sorry, but remind me again when Wire last beat Wigan at Wembley or OT?

Nope. I went to the RFL Disciplinary website, and looked it up.

I find it pays to have some facts before I go running off at the mouth.

More people should do that.

No it's about Wigan's tactics and how one-eyed fans of other teams perceive them to be "underhand."

Now scuttle back off to your cave.

Um where did you get your facts from? According to the rfl disciplinary page the 17 players Wigan played in the semi final has had 50 citings this year alone. Breakdown being:

Bowen 6; charnley 1; gelling 1; Sarginson 3; Burgess 0; green 0; smith 0; flower 6; mcilorum 5; Crosby 1; tomkins 1; Farrell 4; SOL 4; powell 5; Pettybourne 8; Clubb 2; Bateman 3.

By comparison the Saints 17 who played in the semi have had 29, Warrington had 31 and Catalans 36. the leeds team who lost to Catalans had 29 citings over the course of the year...

All info from the rfl disciplinary page - I chose the semi teams for the comparison because a) I can't be bothered to do the statistics for all 5 squads and b) it seemed an even ground to compare usual playing standards from...

Citings are "things that are close to the line so we look into it" - charges only come if the line is crossed. But this is precisely the perception - Wigan play closer to the line than most other teams (which is why they're more cited) which gives the perception of being dirty, even if it isn't actual foul play.

Hence why I used citings itself.

Fair point tbh.

But how many players got disciplinary action taken against them. From what i can gather Wigan were not the worst in SL.

There is a difference between playing to the edge of the rules and going over them like Hohaia and Flower did on the weekend.

Who's perception is it though? It certainly isn't my perception.

I don't care about perception, I care about facts, as they are the only things that prove anything.

It could also be argued that, in the perception of the committee responsible for citings, Wigan did more things that were close to the line. However, the number of charges that followed proved their perception to be wholly incorrect.

He is just using any statistic he can get to justify his argument and refusing to look further as it will not uphold his argument any further.