If it wasn't a "likely" scoring opportunity why did McGuire injure himself in the process of preventing Carmont from supporting Richards? He clearly thought there was a real chance that leeds could have lost.

A lot of leeds fans are so annoyed that they will be without their star player for so long they blindly refuse to accept what he did was wrong. Over the last week we've heard everything from "Wigan wouldn't have scored" to frankly pathetic comments that the injury happened before he grabbed hold of Carmont. How many leeds fans have said "what McGuire did was wrong - and he paid far too steep a price for it"? Not many.

This was then reinforced by the leeds coach who has still failed to mention McGuire's actions or apologise to members of the Wigan team for accusing them for injuring McGuire when he was on the floor. Rather than admit he was wrong and own his comments; he has got Peacock to wade in and complain in the press as well to back him up.

Saying Wigan wouldn't have scored is exactly the same as Wigan fans saying Wigan would have scored both unknown quantities.
Again the plain facts are McGuire didn't cost Wigan the game, Wigan and in particularly Richards blew it plain and simple.

And of course what McGuire did was 'wrong'. It was a professional foul and deserved a penalty and at worst a yellow card. What irks leeds fans is the total over reaction and that somehow McGuire deserved to have a career threatening injury for it.

FWIW I'm not a fan of what both Peacock and Mclennan have said on the press, and I'm especially not a fan of what Phil Clark said in the press.

Please mate stop talking Sense...

McLennan and Peacock are irate at Phil Clarke's article, and rightly so. He's the biggest moron in the whole affair.

Imagine if Wayne Rooney pulls back Steven Gerrard outside the penalty area in the last minute of a game, giving away a free-kick but tearing his ligaments in the process. Alan Hansen says on TV that Rooney deserves to be hospitalized and out of the game for eight months. How would Ferguson react? How would anyone react?

It's unfortunate for Wigan that Clarke is wholly associated with their club, but that's testament to his unprofessionalism as well.

FFS. Whats happend has happend, its not the end of the world, and we get to see (hopefully) another classic between 2 very good teams. It's time to move on.

The reaction of a few fans regarding Mcguire deserving of his injury was while the wounds were still fresh and I would imagine many views have been somewhat tempered. You will always get fans who still hold that opinion and in this free country of ours they have as much right as you to their opinion. Deal with it!!!

I would say the same ammount of Leeds fans who are prepared to accept that Mcguire cheated is about the same amount of wigan fans who think he got what he deserved. Not many!!

Peacock are Bluesy coming out in the press is an embarasment to the Leeds club IMO..

Back up a bit. Fester kicked off straight after the game, way before Clarke's article. Giving him the benefit of the doubt he could have made his (totally wrong) accusation that McGuire was taken out off the ball without speaking to the player or seeing a replay. However, when he subesquently realised he was totally in the wrong he could and should have diffused the whole situation. Instead he bleated to the press on another couple of occasions.

Bit far fetched that a lunchbox or it's contents would make it onto the pitch, but then again this is Wigan supporters we're talking about so why not.

WUM. Just been reading your efforts on the Rhino's forum!

Clarke has no association with Wigan at the present time. And he doesn't speak for Wigan. You and others like you are associating him with Wigan because it suits you to.

What's sticking in your craw is that Wigan have not responded to the childish comments by McLennan in his after-match interview, and they certainly won't be responding to Jamie Peacock any more than they'd respond to the barking of a rather foolish dog on a streetcorner.

At the end of the day, this whole McGuire thing is being massively over-egged. I've said it before and I'll say it again - Wigan lost the match because they failed to take their chances. But McLennan and Peacock trying to cast Leeds as victims is not going to wash in this neck of the woods. Sorry, but there it is.

Firstly, I'm associating Clarke with Wigan because he *seems* to represent Wigan fans. I know that the club have no responsibility for what he says, and should not be judged by him. But what Clarke and some fans here have said with hyperbole about "crime" and "justice" and wishing serious injury on a player can be judged as ridiculous and unacceptable.

Secondly,I might be wrong on this, but I don't remember McLennan accusing anyone of injuring Danny McGuire. I remember that straight after the match he said he had concerns about how McGuire suffered his injury, and that the authorities should look at the tape. Given that everyone's focus was elsewhere (where should the penalty be taken? will he score it?), I don't see a problem with that - nobody at that time knew what had happened when McGuire was on the floor. It was worth looking into, it was looked into, there was nothing in it. End of that particular story.

And, yes, the story has been overegged. It's fine that Wigan are keeping quiet about it. It's also fine that Leeds are choosing to play it another way, but to be fair there has been nothing massively incendiary in McLennan's comments if you look at them in full. As is the way with these things, the headlines have distorted, and the forums have distorted further.

That's the way things go before important games: it's been like this before Leeds-Saints knockout games over the past few years, and Saints-Bradford games before that. You've probably forgotten what it's like...