Tusons leg was clearly under the ball..... cant see what all the fuss is about on this decision.... obviously no try.

It would still be Sam Tomkins fault...



Oh and Wigan are cheats waaa waaa waaa!

This thread is clearly being influenced by Eddie's and Steveo's poor commentating. The try could have been given, but there was no camera angle that suggested the ball could have been grounded, given the positioning of the ball in relation to Tuson's leg. The fact that pair of idiots went on about it for so long was a joke.

Agreed.



It seems it is ok to score a try by knocking the ball out of a player on the ground using your knees and feet into his back.



But if a try is disallowed because there is absolutely no evidence of it touching the ground, and lots of evidence that it's sitting on top of a players legs then the video ref is bent!

That was a loose carry by a poor player. Don't see what you are complaining about.

There was one angle that they only used once that clearly showed the ball grounded between Tusons legs. Im sometimes wondering if the Video refs are sat 16 feet from the screen because I was 3 feet away and that ball was clearly grounded. He then went on to look at the other 2 shots repeatedly that were inconclusive.



The Wigan try was obstruction, period. Professional refs should not be this inconsistent, and im not one to moan at the officials. It would have been harsh but by the letter of the law the collision stops the slide so irrelevant as to whether he could have made a challenge the fact that the gap holds the next man up means it must be deemed as obstruction. Again, professional referees sat in a video box should not be getting this wrong

Evidently, there wasn't.



If there was a camera shot which ''clearly showed the ball grounded'' over the line, then it would have been given a try.



Not everything's a conspiracy.

If the ball was four feet long then maybe it would have been a try.

There was! From the front on angle! A ball cant lose 2 inches of length therefore it must have been grounded. I think your coach agreed

Exactly. There was a camera angle which at least looked like the ball was down. It was a classic case of benefit of the doubt for me and Maguire knew it was a try himself.



The obstruction issue is mighty annoying. They change their mind week in week out on obstruction and it's not a hard rule to call on.

The ball was clearly grounded.



I know this because Tuson has the ability to remove his legs below the knee.

I saw that too. Sky only showed that angle once. It seemed the most conclusive of all. Makes you wonder if they are tyring to find a reason NOT to give a try.



Solomona knows he got the ball down V Wigan at the HJ last year, no benefit of the doubt there either. Is there a common denominator