I'm sure Phil Clarke will have all those stats ready for the next time he bores the crap out of us with stats.

Strangely not seen or heard of him since last Saturday

What is quite interesting, is that Wigan had an extra 22 incidents looked at, which resulted in no charge. So an actual difference of 0 charges brought against both clubs.

Not quite - I said found guilty in the SL this season. Being charged with something does not imply guilt. Saints have had more players found guilty of foul play in the SL this season than Wigan. However you'd think Wigan went onto the pitch with AK47s with the bile threads like this throw up. Hull KR and Catalan had more players found guilty than either Wigan or Saints.

As already been stated there is no difference the number of incidents resulting in no charge because there wasn't actually anything wrong in terms of foul play that required any kind of disciplinary punishment. Perhaps it shows even the RFL are falling for the urban myth and when they actually look at the detail there isn't anything there.

And where precisely would you have expected to see him? Newsnight? Never Mind the Buzzcocks? Down your local?

He was probably expecting a personal email full of grovelling apologies for being a Wiganer, which in typical grandstanding Saints fan fashion, he could then reject.

Kieron Cunningham received no ban whatsoever when he forearmed a player in the face whilst on the floor, and fractured said player's eye-socket (Stosic of Wakefield). No ban, no threat of police, for what was a far worse incident. It is just a shame that Flower didn't keep his composure, because he's NOT a dirty player, far from it; but had he done so it should have been St Helens down to 12 men for the match, and I suspect they would have lost by more than 40 points.

Why would they need to look at the number of times "they get close to stepping over the line"? I don't see your point. The line is drawn where it is for a reason (i.e. that it isn't foul play) so why should they look at addressing play that's within the rules of the game. Shall we also look at addressing incidents that were close to being cited? And then incidents that were nearly close to being cited? Then incidents that were almost nearly close to....well I think you get the point! The rules are set out. Play within them and that is fine regardless of what some fans perceive. To be perfectly frank, if we listened and, God forbid, acted on what some fans perceived we'd have Ben Flower arrested and put in jail (and even worse!) by now.

Maybe we should use this as a yard stick: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj57GvEj2DI

Maybe we should use this as a yard stick: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj57GvEj2DI

He's basically been on sky all week telling us it could be a big score and showing us his boring stats on how Wigan are better than saints.

He's gone AWOL now tho

Well, the season is over so he's hardly likely to be on sky is he? Maybe he'll pop up on the darts coverage with an apology to you all. His job is to present stats. That's a part of sky's coverage.

Stats are something we all use to back up our arguments from time to time. Wigan scored most points and conceded the least over the season, so the stats are likely to show Wigan as being better than the rest. FWIW I think the stats are overdone as the only one that counts is the score at he end of the game.

I personally am pleased for James Roby who for me should have been MoS. a hooker who plays the full 80 minutes, not someone who comes on when the defence is tiring. I am also pleased for Nathan Brown who shut all the hypocrites up on the Saints board who said he was no use. Likewise all the Saints 'fans' who said Wello should have retired. I think you should start a thread saying sorry to these guys because they delivered success and a good number of 'fans' were badly wrong.

Rumour is that he has been phoning Sky since the big game, demanding to be allowed to bore people with statistics about how wonderful Stains are...