: Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:29 pm  

What has been overlooked re Allen's contribution was his one on one steal from Blaymire(?) in the opening minute that led to Ali's opening try.
I thought his tackling generally was an improvement on previous performance but he does lack pace. Pity about the break with a little more composure he should have taken the 1st tackle or looked to come inside or arguably even better have passed to Scott Donald. But what I couldn't see was if the Wakefield player had got in a position to prevent that.
If so then he should have taken the tackle. It would have been tackle one, who knows what the next sets would have led to? But we're all great with hindsight.

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:13 pm  

I thought Ganson was appauling for both teams 17 pens in 20 minutes was shocking and not justified. The game struggled to recover from his appauling 20minute display. If we had 2 players back i.e. a brough or a scully we probably would have won. I really didnt think you guys deserved to win last night your 2 out of 3 trys came from terrible errors by us. Draw was a fair result

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:14 pm  

Old Feller wrote:

What has been overlooked re Allen's contribution was his one on one steal from Blaymire(?) in the opening minute that led to Ali's opening try.
I thought his tackling generally was an improvement on previous performance but he does lack pace. Pity about the break with a little more composure he should have taken the 1st tackle or looked to come inside or arguably even better have passed to Scott Donald. But what I couldn't see was if the Wakefield player had got in a position to prevent that.
If so then he should have taken the tackle. It would have been tackle one, who knows what the next sets would have led to? But we're all great with hindsight.

Not overlooked entirely... just though the crucial element was different.

DoubleAone wrote:

Fekwits report....

The lad did OK. Nice early touch with a little chip kick into the in-goal that forced the position for Ali's try.
Busy defensively and with a bit more experiece would have made more of the break.

Took a big knock in the second half but stood his ground.

Not helped being played out of position IMO.............. 6/10

A much better all round performance than the friendly fixture and given this was within a disrupted team it is better then first appears really.

If this continues and with the Eastwood development then the lad may well have the opporunities..... a can see some real potential developing...but just not in the backs.

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:14 pm  

newgroundb4cas wrote:

I thought Ganson was appauling for both teams 17 pens in 20 minutes was shocking and not justified. The game struggled to recover from his appauling 20minute display. If we had 2 players back i.e. a brough or a scully we probably would have won. I really didnt think you guys deserved to win last night your 2 out of 3 trys came from terrible errors by us. Draw was a fair result

You've convinced me. The point is in the post.

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:18 pm  

Dave Heron's Moustache wrote:

You've convinced me. The point is in the post.

I deserve 2 points for the Ganson comment . Even the hardened of Rhino fan must say the game struggled to recover from that padantic t*at in orange .

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:23 pm  

newgroundb4cas wrote:

I deserve 2 points for the Ganson comment . Even the hardened of Rhino fan must say the game struggled to recover from that padantic t*at in orange .

I am constantly surprised that our opponents fans seem to think that a free flowing, penalty light game will suit their team more than Leeds? Even with pedantic reffing and stop-start games we still manage to score a good 300-400 points more than everyone bar Stains. Imagine what we could rattle up without a Ganson on the pitch?

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:02 pm  

Dave Heron's Moustache wrote:

I am constantly surprised that our opponents fans seem to think that a free flowing, penalty light game will suit their team more than Leeds? Even with pedantic reffing and stop-start games we still manage to score a good 300-400 points more than everyone bar Stains. Imagine what we could rattle up without a Ganson on the pitch?

You seemed to have miss read me there. Im not saying it may have favoured us. Im saying it would have certainly favoured the 15000 people that were watching that game because the ref killed it as a spectacle in that first 20minutes of sheer sh*te refing.

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:05 pm  

newgroundb4cas wrote:

You seemed to have miss read me there. Im not saying it may have favoured us. Im saying it would have certainly favoured the 15000 people that were watching that game because the ref killed it as a spectacle in that first 20minutes of sheer sh*te refing.

He didnt spoil it for me last night,,,although when he starts "inventing" rules I do get a bit frustrated.

I think for the first 20 minutes he forgot it wasnt on Sky and that the audience love to watch HIM.

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 6:32 pm  

JINJER wrote:

Why on earth would they ban a Leeds player?????As if?

Suppose, lets face it Smithy wasn't band for the final after booting someone in the face (I forget who). But **Calderspud** was banned for two games recently for tripping and they may want to make an example out of Bailey.

edit!

Not Calderspud, was Mathers......whoops!

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 6:51 pm  

_dyl_ wrote:

Suppose, lets face it Smithy wasn't band for the final after booting someone in the face (I forget who). But Calderspud was banned for two games recently for tripping and they may want to make an example out of Bailey.

assuming he is found guilty first