Which takes precedence? iRule or Cookie-based Persistence?

Hi teemo_13 , 
Let we explain , we have an iRule used to block specific resource on website , let we say " xyz.com/admin" , we will configure an iRule to block any one write " xyz.com/admin" url in his browser and permit anything else to this website. 
Thats good till now , I will assume that I have configured a Cookie Persistence profile so each user will be served by the first server " Pool_mem " replied first time. 

so that , If someone wants to access any resource on "xyz.com" website other than " xyz.com/admin" should work without issues , but if someone tries to access this resource "xyz.com/admin" , it should be blocked by irule Even if this a valid user and is already served by specific Pool_member due to Cookie persistence. 

> in my Example , I want to describe that this user should be blocked by iRule whatever its a new connection or an existing persistence connection. 

> hence , we can deduce that iRule should look at the request first of all and take the precedence. 
I want to say also that iRule is the first Component the Virtual server use againt requests in case there is an iRule attached already through this Virtual server.