Re: Silverwood. : Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:19 am  

GouldyCrusader wrote:

Did you think so ? I thought that his left leg was planted on the floor in the field of play and his right leg was up in there air - I think it would have been given.

Ah, well, its finished. You were more clinical when needed to be and played up to the end. Something we struggle to do !

I've seen us lose that game so many times before from following Cas. Losing becomes a habit. I suppose it was a bit of a sense of deja vue from the Leeds game for you lot to an extent.


Have you got Quins to play? I'd expect you to beat Wakefield in a couple of weeks.

Re: Silverwood. : Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:47 am  

GouldyCrusader wrote:

Most decisions by the VR were correct, but I thought your winning try and Tony Martin's alleged obstruction which cancelled out our first try were 50/50 and difficult to call.

I was at the game and watching it in live play, I thought it was an obstruction, but on the replay (both in the ground and when I got home) it seemed Martin was only standing his ground. He didn't really move towards Younhquest to purposely obstruct him in my opinion.

The winning try looked to me that he did ground the ball on the line eventually, but he was short firstly and then used a second movement to go over.

I thought we deserved the victory. Should have been finished by half-time really, but we didn't make the most of good field position. What lost us the game was not kicking the 2 points when we had chance to and not giving Michael Witt the kicking duties instead of Clinton.

There we go ! Same old same old for us. I'm used to it now.

The Reardon try would have been given had Martin not leant to the right so looking as if he was intending to impede Youngquest.

As for Parker's try, it was all in one movement? He didn't stop at any point and then plant the ball over.

Re: Silverwood. : Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:29 am  

When Reardon first went in my lad called the foot in play. We watched the replay and I said "well done son, good spot". For me and my lad, the try wouldn't have stood anyway because his foot touched the line. Ignore Stevos comments. Reardons foot was in the air, but that was at the point when Reardon was grounding the ball. His foot touched the white wash and then was lifted into the air before all that happened.

These kind of things we always seem to debate over after games. It just makes a change for "obstructions", and "wether the ball touched the line or not", decisions to go our way. Right or wrong we're due a call going our way by now.

Crap game though. Shoddy attempt at rugby league from both sides.

Re: Silverwood. : Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:39 am  

mdean wrote:

"some coaching speak"

You're wasting your time old lad. Most fans of our game have no idea on actually coaching and playing the game. It takes a lot for us fans to see what coaches are talking about. I'm like you, I do spot some things and understand some things but I know i'm a long way off coaching a full grown SL side. There's many a time i'm at a game and hear peoples comments and shake my head. I get what you are saying about hookers, it's just a pity Hudson is old and slow now. Hopefully he can pass on that knowledge to Milner and Clarke before he goes.

Re: Silverwood. : Sun Jul 17, 2011 1:43 pm  

Ponterflfan wrote:

Amazin how one week after being the most hated referee in SL Richard Silverwood produces a decision that gives Cas an undeserved victory and guess what not a single posting. Come on you guys what have you got to say about him now? And yes I am a Cas fan.

What is there to say, if you are meaning the moore last minute try.
Silverwood got it right the ball was grounded and grounded on the line. TRY
He would have looked a fool disallowing it, it was clear to see.

Silverwood did his job and did it right FOR ONCE.

Re: Silverwood. : Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:57 pm  

marshman wrote:

You're wasting your time old lad. Most fans of our game have no idea on actually coaching and playing the game. It takes a lot for us fans to see what coaches are talking about. I'm like you, I do spot some things and understand some things but I know i'm a long way off coaching a full grown SL side. There's many a time i'm at a game and hear peoples comments and shake my head. I get what you are saying about hookers, it's just a pity Hudson is old and slow now. Hopefully he can pass on that knowledge to Milner and Clarke before he goes.

High praise indeed cheers, I was a crap coach and a worse player! Although since taking up just watching, it is amazing how few tackles I have missed, I haven't dropped any ball or made any bad decisions since! Obviously I am great now!

Cheers.

Re: Silverwood. : Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:36 pm  

mdean wrote:

High praise indeed cheers, I was a crap coach and a worse player! Although since taking up just watching, it is amazing how few tackles I have missed, I haven't dropped any ball or made any bad decisions since! Obviously I am great now!

Cheers.

Re: Silverwood. : Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:48 pm  

Towns88 wrote:

I've seen us lose that game so many times before from following Cas. Losing becomes a habit. I suppose it was a bit of a sense of deja vue from the Leeds game for you lot to an extent.


Have you got Quins to play? I'd expect you to beat Wakefield in a couple of weeks.

Yes - deja vue all over again. By no means we played brilliant, it was a poor game, but I just think sometimes, ''what more do we have to do ?''. We're due a win. I think first half we played some good stuff and the way Wakey and Quins are going, I expect to beat them both (Quins easily).

Although I was dissapointed after the game, our season's over now and we need to look to recruiting for next season.

Re: Silverwood. : Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:35 pm  

I do think the decision were correct, but on another day with another ref they may well have been different, as happened at Wigan when we had a try chalked off that would have been given Benefit of doubt 9 times out of 10, the other one Wigan were given that was an obstruction, even generally biased commentators said it should have been disallowed.
At Crusaders Reardon's was not a try as he went into touch regardless of whether it was penalty or not and Parker could clearly be seen grounding the ball in one movement.
Of course there is the Welsh factor, so maybe the pictures in the valley's have some kind of time delay which enables Crusaders to tackle Parker short