Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 3:46 pm  

OBVIOUSLY NOT a Giants mistake,or they woul have been playing in Blue and White. So WHY didn't Cas just borrow 17 shirts form those numpties who preffered to dance about half naked all afternoon? Then we could have kicked off a bit sooner.

Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 4:51 pm  

Fully wrote:

How is it Cas's fault when it clearly stated in the RFL Kit Directive: Huddersfield PRINCIPAL.

You may wish to check your eyesight before babbling anymore, the kit directive CLEARLY states Huddersfield ALTERNATIVE ie not the home shirt.
And cas was also told 1 week before the match that they would be wearing the ALTERNATIVE shirt.

Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 4:54 pm  

According to league express it may actually be the fault of the RFL Quote"it appears the and RFL employee may have misinterpreted that information" this after both clubs were advised to wear alternative kit

Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 5:57 pm  

some people have short memories, we remembered how come cas and the RFL didn't?


it was agreed in february when cas asked to wear their new away kit to "showcase" it on the first televised game of the weekly rounds, we agreed and so it was agreed that on the return fixture cas would wear their principle kit.so either the RFL or castleford or both forgot or chose to ignore this.
no blame whatsoever on huddersfields part.

surely cas fans remember this game??

Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:04 pm  

jeramiah wrote:

You may wish to check your eyesight before babbling anymore, the kit directive CLEARLY states Huddersfield ALTERNATIVE ie not the home shirt.
And cas was also told 1 week before the match that they would be wearing the ALTERNATIVE shirt.

Jeramiah, what it says on the RFL kit directive TODAY is the exact opposite of what it said YESTERDAY a couple of hours after the game. The RFL have updated the sheet to cover their own mistakes. This was noted by many posters, me being one of them and I even still have a copy of both thanks to browser histories.

Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:09 pm  

Bonzo wrote:

Arrogance is something I hadn't ever associated with Huddersfield fans until last night when you all booed a Cas player as he was stretchered off the pitch injured. I hope you're all pleased with yourselves and your sportsmanship.

I recall great times working in Huddersfield and having loads of banter with the Fartowners whenever our teams' paths crossed. However it's true, there does seem to be some kind of correlation between a club's apparent success or status and the attitude of its fan base. I prefer to think the decent ones are still there as they always have been and it's just that success encourages the local ar*eholes - the ones who have no idea about RL banter and genuine fans cameraderie - to come out of the woodwork.

Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:15 pm  

http://www.superleaguefans.com/videos/play/lcu0NcybV80/ Ha ha! Quality.

http://www.superleaguefans.com/videos/play/lcu0NcybV80/ Ha ha! Quality.

Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:36 pm  

marshman wrote:

http://www.superleaguefans.com/videos/play/lcu0NcybV80/

Ha ha! Quality.

Brilliant v.funny

delboy66(aye of the tigers fanzine)

Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:31 pm  

Bonzo wrote:

Arrogance is something I hadn't ever associated with Huddersfield fans until last night when you all booed a Cas player as he was stretchered off the pitch injured. I hope you're all pleased with yourselves and your sportsmanship.

I think less Giants fans booed than Cas fans cheered when Brough was on all fours but I haven't come on here to pick a fight. Non of us from any club like to see a player injured. The frustration of the Giants fans was after seeing a player appear to have a go at Crabtree with his knees whilst he was getting up to play the ball, then fall over alla Ronaldo when Crabtree pushed him and then come off on a stretcher. This is obviously now not the case as your player was genuinely injured and I don't think you'll find any Giants fan who is not sorry that your lad is injured and won't be playing for a while. Hope he gets well soon.

Re: kits : Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:01 pm  

Ceebeejames wrote:

I assume your post is a send up - you can't really be that dumb?

First :At the moment the galpharm is basically 60% owned by davy and 40% owned by the council. In time davy will sell 40% to Town. Even when that happens the enduring contract created when the stadium was built will protect all 3 parties. The contract runs for over100 years

Second:the new playing surface includes 'artificial grass' plus real grass grown from seeds. These seeds need maximum sunlight to grow best and that occurs in.....June and July so sadly your childlike theory is nonsense.

Third: If the game was played at the Galpharm the Giants would still have requested the alternate kit - this being part of an agreement to help out Cas back in February! the difference being that if Cas had turned up at the galpharm with the wrong kit they could not have borrowed Giants shirts for the game.

other than those glaring inaccuracies your post is fine.

So you admit that you don't own your ground as such your run by the football side of things, why not do the upgrade when the rugby season finishes thats right you didn't have a choice.

Not intrested about all the ins and outs of the damn grass. Just deflecting that you didn't have any input in the whole situation.

As for the agreement about the shirts how do you know this, have i missed the proof you provided.

As for being thick who cares i might be might not be, not relevant to the subject in my initial post go do one anarak.