Quote: Stevosfalseteeth "Burgess is questioning the video refs integrity. You can tell he's been heavily brainwashed by Wane for a number of years.'" Or maybe hes spent some time round Brian McDermott: www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/22166286

Quote: Stevosfalseteeth "Burgess is questioning the video refs integrity. You can tell he's been heavily brainwashed by Wane for a number of years.'" Or maybe hes spent some time round Brian McDermott: www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/22166286

You can also tell that your lack of the required component would prevent Wane doing the same to you.

So where in fact does it state the reaskn why catalans got more penalties?

What did they say?

They said the ref was 'gay' and then they punched a student.

Or maybe not.

It doesn't. Against every other SL club, when playing at home Catalans got more penalties than the opposition. It's not easy to prove - and of course, however unlikely, it could well be because every visiting team committed lots more infringements, but McDermott was suggesting that the referees were perhaps being influenced by the crowd. The stats backed him up - ergo he was stating a fact - and for this he got fined.

That's not quite the same as moaning about a 50/50 video ref decision that didn't go your way or bleating about the ref having a mare (see any Cunningham/Baloo post match loss interview for an example of this.)

Or maybe they punched a prone man unconcious on the floor putting his life in danger.

Or maybe not.

Indeed...glass houses and all that.

I was merely pointing out that maybe taking lessons in class from Leeds isn't necessarily as clear cut as the OP was making out.

Saints on the other hand have never had players who wouldn't be considered paragons of virtue. Ever.

How is it a "fact" if it could also be because a visiting team committed lots more infringements? Maybe its possible, or even probable that this is the case, but it doesn't make it a fact just because there were more penalties given against visiting teams. The only way of determining that would be to review every decision, non-decision, question the ref (undermine him if you will) and compare like for like - not basing it on a generic penalty count.

He is actually questioning the refs being impartial (which starts to border on corruption and I would suggest more serious than having a moan about a 50/50 call not going your way) and yet when a Wigan player has questioned a "50/50 decision" which means the ref has 50% chance of getting it wrong (which couldn't be proved other than probably technology that we don't have and using physics) he's suddenly the one that's classless. At least he wasn't saying the refs were being impartial, just that they thought he got the decision wrong which as refs are human, will happen. If its a 50/50 call then surely that's open to interpretation and ones opinion. Unfortunately for Wigan the ultimate opinion is that of the refs and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks - but it doesn't mean they can't have an opinion.

I think its just a case of some people aren't even happy just with Wigan losing, so much is their hatred of Wigan...

Correct, You've hit the nail on the head.

Some Wigan fans are getting like Liverpool fans in football were every defeat is down to some conspiracy or other, or down to someone in the sport who hates them and always out to get them.

Talking about classless, I'm very surprised with what Jamie Peacock said in his homecoming speech yesterday. That was lacking in class. I hope Wigan use this next year when we play Hull KR, I thought Peacock was better than that.

The OP has been like a 7 year old since Leeds won on Saturday trying to get a rise out of people on here. Best to ignore.