So slight auto correct equals you still not admitting you couldn't work out the 14-10 thing?

Duly noted.

Maths? You mean incorrectly thinking he'd said 14-12 instead of 14-10? You think that's maths?

It's funny how you want to discount daft spelling mistakes, because that's all they've managed. I happened to misunderstand "the score after the incident was 14-10" as meaning the actual score on the board at that point was 14-10, which of course means I have no understanding of English if you're clutching at straws trying to get any sort of victory, however small, in the aftermath of a defeat at the hands of my team. Being unable to spell though, well that is no indication at all of a person's poor grasp of English is it? Let's keep this going, and maybe eventually my iPad will do an "autocorrect" (

) and you really will be able to tug each other off!

regardless of all the petty grammar/spelling posts, do you now see that the notion put forward that Peacock and indeed Leeds went into their shells, and were battered by Wigan is a load of tosh, considering the fact that leeds out scored Wigan after the bit of biff.?

Work out? You said it in an ambiguous way. I said that pages ago. I thought you were referring to the actual score because of the way you said "the score after the incident was..." In your eagerness to jump all over that you've shown your own grasp of English to be pitiful. You've confused boarder with border and except with accept like you probably confuse your with you're and their with there. You know the saying about people in glass houses right? Then again, maybe you don't, so let me spell it out to you: you don't have the intellect or aptitude to critique another person's intelligence or grasp of English. Not by a long, long way.

'A' spelling mistake is a bit different to 3 pages of "it was 14-12, what are you talking about?" "Who scored for Leeds to give them such a lead?"

The printer, take note.



I don't think anyone said Leeds on the whole went into their shells but Peacock, in comparison to his earlier aggression, definitely did. He took the ball in as you'd expect him to, always. There was none of the earlier fire though; our lads had stood up to him more than they did two weeks previously. As for the points scored after the biff, I don't think much of that was to do with Peacock myself, but even if it were, that isn't what "going into his shell" was a reference to, it was his loss of aggression, the likes of which saw him steam for Micky Mac and come off second best.

And as I pointed out at the time, if you were actually capable of effectively communicating then there would have been no issue. Misunderstanding what someone wrote because they wrote it badly is one thing, repeatedly confusing similar sounding words is another, and one that definitely indicates a poor grasp of English, something you should have corrected if you wanted to jump all over my posts.

Boring now bye bye my wino and pie eating friends!

Oh well that confirms it with that post. peacock one of the toughest battlers in the history of the game went "into his shell" because you said so.

You could've just lived with Peacock and Co came off second best but no it had to be Peacock went into his shell, and was battered and was smashed by a bunch of 7 year olds from Wigan.

He hardly came off second best, Mcclorum snaked him round the chops and got sin binned which could have cost his team the game.

Lol calm down dear.

I'm perfectly calm, talking to idiots always has that effect on me.

Have you worked out the 14-10 thing yet???

Funny how all these armchair defenders of the sport's purity are disgusted by Wigan's appalling tactics, etc, etc,. and yet Wellens (no Wigan fan I think we can agree) was perfectly happy to give them great credit for how well they played.

Wigan played very well and they got under Leeds' skin which worked but, there a few grubby tactics going on, one late hit to the back of a player who had no chance to see it coming and one dangerous throw and a few head highs. I'm sure wigans game plan was to rough Leeds up a bit and it worked I personally found it a bit ugly .

The irony as always with Leeds is that if we decide to mix it up they play the victim and act like they have done no wrong.

yesterday was a brilliant example of 2 teams going hell for leather at each other, isn't that what people want? I wouldn't come out and say Wigan played dirty. They played aggresively. When you play aggresively there will be the odd occasion where it goes to far. Dudsons late "shot" was stupid for one and I won't shy away from that. 2 weeks ago our pack got battered by Leeds because we weren't aggressive enough and got bullied around the park. Yesterday we did the only thing we could to fix that, which was to come out all guns blazing and fight fire with fire and I don't think Leeds expected it, especially with the squad of players we had. Micky Mac is no angel and he can take it too far sometimes but when you have Leeds have the likes of Bailey in their team it makes me laugh how they can moan about Wigan. Saw a clip of Danny Mcguire intentionally kicking out at George William's chest too.. not seen much from Leeds fans about that incident though....

Re the McGuire incident he wasn't kicking out at his chest he was kicking his legs to try and get on with the PTB there really was nothing in that. But I will say McGuire was riled all game for whatever reason (maybe getting smashed in the back when not looking?) and he was being niggly a side of his game I don't like.

Bailey is a pantomime villain nothing more, I personally wouldn't be too bothered if he moved on from Leeds he did pretty much nothing all game apart from have a rubbish scrap.

as I said before Wigan got the tactics right I just thought they were ugly

I think we've put this to bed no less than three times now and you're still going on about it.



You should get a t-shirt made with "That 14-10 Thing" on it to remind you of that time a Wiganer misunderstood what you said. It's clearly an important event for you.

By putting to bed you mean trying to deflect attention away from it and never admitting you cocked up?

Duly noted.

By "a Wiganer" presumably you mean yourself? It's OK to admit you misunderstood.

I'm sure you will find it easy to 'dumb down'.

You won't do, for the same reason that no one really mentions it when it happens in countless other games. Ratboy Tomkins is a master of kicking out.

I love how they all run in and starting pushing and shoving everytime there's even the slightest hint of foul play! They conned the sky team good and proper after the McIlorum challenge on JP with even Phil Clarke shouting for a sending off.

Turns out it was only just about worthy of a penalty.

It needs looking at and the powers that be need to clamp down on them. They're inciting situations that don't need to be blown out of proportion.

Rubbish, what needs to be clamped down on is dangerous throws in a tackle and hitting players from behind without the ball, you know the things that lead to all in scuffles.

They didn't con anyone MM had just been told as captain to calm him and his players down, the very next tackle he clearly hits peacock with a high shot, he deserved everything he got.

the game was niggly all the way through, from both sides, wigan just took it a bit further by turning it into foul play, which nearly cost them the game, these getting under the skin tactics will work sometimes but not all.

Some wigan fans could do with learning how to be graceful in victory as well as defeat.

Well thats never gonna happen is it?