I’m also uncertain about the longevity, possibly for slightly different reasons. But, for me, sport thrives on uncertainty. Meaning results of games/outcomes of seasons rather than clubs surviving… RL just has its uncertainty in the wrong place!

I’d take the kind of sustained success enjoyed by Wigan and Saints, obviously, I envy their fans in some ways, and want Rovers to aspire to excellence. But as a fan, there wouldn’t be the same types of moments. I’d learn to live with it, I’m sure, but its absence would not come as a shock.

Relating it to Hull, what this long-trailed investment looks like will be crucial. Rovers have spent well, there’s been a huge amount of hard work and some really good decision making, but Rovers have also spent more than in the past.

There’ll always have to be a threshold though. If everything goes up as no try until proven otherwise, needing clear evidence as an absolute threshold, then there’ll be outrage when tries that are nearly-certainly tries are chalked off. So… balance of probabilities? Which is a guess.

There’s as strong a case as sending everything up as a try unless proven otherwise - it’s just a question who would get the benefit of the doubt.

My guess about Burgess’s try is probably similar to yours, but it is a guess.

Hope they beat 50-0 in the final though.

I actually thought the Joe Burgess interview was quite funny, it's not his fault the try was given, good to have characters in the game rather than players coming out with the same cliches week after week, credit to the boys, we've trained hard all week etc etc

Decision making is the key, both to your current success and our current travails!!
The financial situation at our club almost certainly precludes us from making any sustained challenge at the top right now, but it wasn't the reason for the horrendous year we have just endured. That was completely down to some extremely poor decisions over a number of years across so many areas of the club's operations, particularly player recruitment, the failings of our 2024 intake being well documented on here!

Wholly agree with you about the joy of unexpected moments! I know we have discussed this before, but I'm of the opinion that some Wigan fans probably can't remember some of their titles and Challenge Cup victories due to having so many to choose from. Over the past forty years we have won four major trophies (1991, 2005, 2016/17) and every one of them is burned into my memory, four afternoons which made all the madness and frustration of following an eternally underachieving club feel worthwhile!!

I guess whatever happens next Saturday, you will remember it in detail through the years to come. It's the frission of the unexpected that over-familiarity dulls to the point of meaninglessness? I suspect next Saturday will mean more to the rovers base than it will to Wigan (unless of course you are facing Leigh whose fans will then feel exactly the same as you). I had that feeling with us in each of our major triumphs because they are not everyday occurrences for us!

If I was to give you a piece of personal advice, I would say enjoy the moment, soak it in and revel in being there (whilst trying to contain the butterflies!!). Personal experience has taught me that success can fleeting and it disappears before you have even had chance to savour it.
Maybe it will be different for you. Maybe in years to come you will also have so many titles and cup wins that you can no longer remember them (like Wigan and Saints), but right now you don't know that. For all you know in two years time you may be back amongst the mid-table throng, dreaming of days gone past or days hopefully to come again.

Like I said, grab the moment while it's here, none of us know what tomorrow may bring, unless you're a Wigan fan of course, safe in the knowledge that normal service will be resumed before too long!

Got to ask how we never could squeeze no more than two weeks at a time out of him when he was here .

Played plenty of times and even when we had a good side but never really stood out, he has been at Rovers 5 years and this is his real stand out year, maybe he has matured or something has clicked. Good look to him, very likable player and 100% effort. Shows some players just need a change or a but of confidence.

What I mean by that is that if the on field ref can not state with 100% conviction and award or deny a try himself, they send it to VR without any pre judgment. Then it is purely down to the VR to rule if it’s awarded or denied based on the evidence they have available.

Simply down to poor coaching mixed in with a lackadaisical approach and boys club attitude rather than a drive to better each season.
I’ll no doubt be hammered but Radford was a poor choice and Head coach for top level SL. Yes we won 2 back to back finals at Wembley but I firmly believe that was more down to the leaders and quality we had in the squad at the time. The failure to build from that is there for all to see along with the start of the decline once we lost and didn’t replace those leaders.

Just hoping Wigan do the business today. Better chance then of the Dobbins winning uck all.

The question remains though, how much evidence would the VR need? I suspect that the Burgess try may well have been chalked off by the VR based on balance of probabilities… but the ref sent it up as a try based on balance of probabilities from his viewpoint, which wasn’t the worst.

Aside from that specific example, if they go with ‘clear evidence’ there’ll be controversies when there’s deemed to be a lack of common sense, and if they go for more of a judgement call, there’ll be complaints about a lack of consistency. Yesterday highlighted a problem with the current system, but other systems have problems too.

If it helps you all get over it the words from Liam Moore was “ I saw the ball on the line and instantly up it was worth checking” they you go he was 3 foot away and had no hesitation. TV don’t show his view. Peace and love.

Joe Burgess conceded that he hadn`t scored a try in his post match interview on SKY TV.

A while back the VR system incorporated a 'benefit of doubt' call which effectively amounted to an 'educated guess' scenario in 50/50 calls. That system tended to provoke even greater howls of outrage from those on the receiving end of 'dodgy' calls.

The question surrounds the parameters of decision. What criteria has to be satisfied for a decision to be ratified one way or the other? If it becomes a case of there has to be complete evidence of a ball being grounded, that will most likely cause as many ructions as the current system does, with inconsistency and accusations of guesswork being floated around each week. This is especially true in cases such as last night where, unfortunately, the ball is shielded from camera view by a defender's leg at the precise moment of grounding.

I'm not sure any system is perfect here. Even if the VR rule is altered to 100% evidence = try awarded, 99% evidence = try disallowed, there will still almost certainly be any number of 'controversial' incidents, particularly around ball grounding which is always difficult to see due to the number of arms and legs in camera shot.

Leigh brining in their big game players for the semi. Asiata, Hardaker and Holmes all start