The ball carrying arm hit the ground, if he'd slid over the line then fine, but he reached out. That's not allowed. As Hutchie said earlier.

Looked a clear try to me, the tackler had fallen off.

Thought Phelps had another pretty bad game in defence again tonight. His positioning was all over the place.

Tomkins try - the rules regarding double movements are always changing and who knows what this weeks version is so I won't argue that.

Obst non try, 50-50 but Hull get the wrong end of the stick.

Overall I didn't think the ref did too bad against a team that constantly pushes the envelope. Wigan are a fantastically inventive attacking side but they couple that with the most outrageous cheating and foul play they can get away with. They put the ref under enormous pressure and I thought he stood up reasonably well to them though he certainly could have put a couple in the bin.

What are the biggest worries for me are the injuries to Radford and Moa. I hope they are closely examined and any foul play gets suitably punished. Obviously this won't help Hull as such but the grubby cheating Wigan practice has no place in the game.

The rules aren't exactly clear on this...the rules state...

"Sliding tackle 5. If a tackled player, because of his momentum slides along the ground, the tackle is deemed to have been effected where his slide ends. (See Section 6, 3(c).)"

With regards to a second movement the rules say "When an attacking player is tackled within easy reach of the goal line he should be penalised if he makes a second movement to place the ball over the line for a try."

Given that the rule about a sliding tackle says the tackle is complete when the slide ends and the rule about a second movement refers to when a player is 'tackled' then it would suggest Tomkins was allowed to reach out for the line because the tackle hadn't been completed.

The Radford injury came from a clash of heads with Ben Cross

Agreed, if had slid over then fine. He raised his ball carrying arm off the floor and reached over the try line. No way we would have been given that try.

you can debate it all night but it was given End of story,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,let it ride..............simple fact Long Westerman and Fitz in the team and we win. Injuries and depth of squad costs us big style this season. Lets just hope it gets put right .

Agreed Paul nothing wrong with Tompkins 1st try. If you look at anything long enough you will start to to convince yourself that things are wrong with it, watch it in real time his momentum never stops it's all one movement.

Game by game I can see why the club has decided to bring in someone else for next season, he's not quite good enough.

bull ,watch it on sky super slow ,ball carrying arm does touch the ground ,and Lauaki does not have to move wigans player making wrong choice trying to run through a brick wall ,obst never ran round Lauaki ,if this is the case then all dummy runners are now obstructing

Deluded

Very!!

phelps' positional play is poor. Doesn't look like someone who has played full back that much

Can't agree with that at all.
Him stretching his arm is a separate movement he wasn't entitled to make as he was tackled the second he hit the deck (landed on the ball carrying arm). Him spinning over is one movement, yes. But not the reach over.

Had he landed on his front and reached over would have made it clear as day, yet it was the exact same infringement.

Makes you wonder what the VR was looking for...

The Obst try was clear obstruction though. You can't run towards your players and use them as a shield unfortunately.