Hmmm, selective pausing I feel. Come on now, do not show yourself up, where is the pause when Jefferies foot touches the ball a second or so earlier. Uncle Albert has already got the whistle blown and is pointing at the offending player. I will of course not make you look even more daft by saying if that is when the tap was taken (which it clearly is not as he is shaping to pass the ball) he is in front of the 20 also isn't he???

Wakefield had a man in an offside position when the tap was taken and Buderus was in front of the 20 when he took his. Alibert spotted one and did not spot the other. You are very much wearing your Blue, White & Red tinted specs if you think otherwise.

As I posted above, two wrongs don't make a right, but you seem to want to prove otherwise!

Although I hate commenting against a pro-Leeds bias, isn't one of the rules that the ref himself has to be in position. You can see from the Leeds restart that Alibert is ready, whereas for ours, he isn't. Also, the ball is already in play on that shot, and so Richard Moore must have been just crossing the line when it was taken.

I know the restart can be a lesson in pedantry sometimes, where a player is made to retake it because he isn't central, and then just retakes it in the same spot and nothing is done, but our restart looks messy, with players and the ref all over the place, whereas the Leeds one looks pretty controlled, apart from some of our players not quite getting back.

Hate to say it, but I am with the ref on this one.

No, you are mixing up the current international interpretation of a 20m restart, where the ref does indeed have to be in position (well, back on the 30m line, I am not sure position is the best word) and the tap can not be taken until he has blown the whistle to signal so. In Super League quick tap restarts are allowed and the ref is encouraged to allow them to happen so long as it is otherwise legal and the attacking players have all got back behind the 20m line and are in an onside position.

You make an interesting comment about the position of Alibert and one I had also noticed. The Leeds kick IIRC had come from a deeper field position than the Trinity one, as such the Leeds players has less distance to travel to get behind the 20m line where as the Trinity players had further to travel. The same applies to the ref, meaning that Uncle Albert was able to get back to the 30m before a few of the Trinity players. This could also explain why Alibert missed Buderus being in front of the line, as his position does make that slightly harder to spot from 10m back. What I am saying is that if Alibert had been in a similar position to the this for the Leeds tap he probably would have spotted that Buderus was slightly in front of the 20m line. He should have pulled Leeds back as Buderus was in front of the 20m line, but that does not mean he should have allowed Wakefield to take theirs when Moore was clearly (despite some peoples poor attempts to distort the truth) offside.

Fair point about the Super League and International rules. Thanks for that. My general view is still that the Wakey restart was in the context of a right old mess, whereas the Leeds one looks controlled, with the only players not getting back ours.

I would agree, but I think that is purely down to the relative field positions of both sides, and the ref, when the ball went dead. If Moore had made it back on side in time you could have got some serious yards as far more Leeds players are offside trying to get back to the 30 than Wakey players in the Leeds tap. I suspect that is why Wakey fans are upset that Albert missed Buderus being in front. However, that did not lose you the game, Gleeson rushing out of the line at Senior, getting it wrong, and leaving the gap that he then went through (after being quite ordinary most of the game) a few tackles later did that!

As you can see there is no selective pausing as you wrongly suggest,when BJ sprints and taps the ball,he did it as fast as he could hence why it's hard to pause it with ball touching foot.As this is before the tap and the players are virtually in the same position,anyway take it however you want I just thought i would show it since the topic has been dominated by it and no one has seen a shot of the Wakefield tap only the Leeds one.Neither tap had a impact on the game and I'm not taking anything away from Leeds since this had no bearing on the game.

Richard Moore isn't back, and the ref is pointing at either Moore or BJ.

I think the point being made is about consistency, which could have stopped the Leeds quick tap, which could well have stopped the final Leeds try, but there is a difference between the two restarts.

I agree about the consistency,but on the day I missed this on the TV and had to go back and watch it once I'd read this topic and the impression I'd got from people is Wakey had 2 players who were offside by some distance when he pulled the restart back,but on seeing the replay I was surprised it was such a close call.

Leeds won on Saturday because over the 80 min they were the better side, only just or by a mile it does not really matter. Like last year they mugged us at the end of the game, we should take heart from the positives from this match in view of our recent performances and not let our frustrations overtake us by somebody who try as hard as he can is at best described as incompetent. I would wager this man cannot even spell the word consistancy never mind be expected to apply it. Just one point I would like to make Slugger and it is this, in your opinion which of the two indescretions is the most trivial as it deemed by some on here that ours must be ruled illegal because it appears a lot more severe than their tidgy widgy not worth mentioning illegal 20 metre restart, does that mean its acceptable to stand a yard offside when taking the tap or does that only apply to Leeds who it would seem have a dispensation from the referee to interpret the rules as they see fit.

If you spelt consistency incorrectly on purpose, that it way too deep a joke for most people on here.

The 20m restart is an excuse for the ref to be excessively pedantic, and generally, I would prefer that the players be allowed to get on with it, because does it matter if Buderus is a yard off the line. I suppose it could be argued that does it matter if Moore is a yard in front when BJ takes the tap. Again, not really, but I don't really have a problem with us being pulled back on ours. There are players everywhere and the ref is a long way back. On the Leeds restart, the only problem is really Buderus being a yard in front of the line, but that does that really matter, because on the same token, it looks like Johnson never went back to the 30m line before he turned to defend it, and similarly for BJ, and so the scope for an offside decision was there.

Absolutely correct, based on the actual rules of the game, and ignoring the new "latitude rule".

I agree with the "just get on with it" rule, as long as none of the players in an offside position have any influence on the play.

Moore, with his back to the defence and returning to the mark, has no influence on the play (and if the ball were passed to him in this position, it would hardly constitute an advantage to Wakefield, as he would have to turn on receiving the ball before he could make ground. It would also be a forward pass, of course).

Buderus, playing the ball a yard forward of the mark, gains an advantage for the 1st receiver.

As for the potential for offside, that applies to both teams, as the images clearly show.

Bottom line is, we lost. I'm sure you could pick loads of other incidents from the game that contributed to the outcome too. It's sad for us, but the result and the performance were a hell of a lot better than most of us expected, so take comfort from that.

As I have posted before, I only watched the game live, have not watched it again and the only other reference I have are your screen shot stills but I did see Moore as being off-side at the time (which while being tight, I think we agree he probably was?) and missed Buderus being in front of the line. I don't think Alibert was being inconsistent (as several people state), which to me implies he saw and decided not to bring back Buderus, yet had early decided to bring back Wakefield for Moore not been back on-side, but that he just completely missed Buderus being in front of the 20 altogether! I made exactly the same mistakes as him and that is all I think it was, a mistake!

I think the stats probably tell the story in the end, as they often do, and if you look at tvoc's opta stats that he posts (for this and every Rhinos games) I think you will see why - rlhttps://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?f

The stats are very similar and quite tight but Leeds, in the end, made more yards over more carries (although a slightly lower average per carry) yet made more tackles, had the same number of errors and of course scored 6 to Wakey's 5 tries. Yes, you ended up on the wrong side of the penalty count and might not have really deserved to, but that is the story for me and explains why you were narrowly beaten.