Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 9:24 am  

Guardian says 11-9 in our favour on penalties, can’t see how that’s right it felt like every set we conceded a penalty.

Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 11:03 am  

Captain Hook wrote:

I still can’t see how we got a penalty try. My reading of it was if the tackle was a bit lower it wasn’t a certainty that a try would be scored (I’m fairly sure that’s the test).

Especially when Sutcliffe got held up over the line in the first half in a very similar tackle and we didn't even get a penalty. There were some strange decisions all around. Both teams got away with tackles that arguably could have brought about cards, but they chose to make an example of an accidental head clash.

[Fantastic Mr Catpiss]

Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 11:40 am  

Hard to judge on last night but a few thoughts.

Musgrove could do with not sprinting and then slowing down just before hitting the line.

For all he got wrong, got to thank Powell for james harrison, he's a pearler.

Wrench is gonna need to sort his defence out and quick, he's been pin pointed in all 3 games and you can see why.

Wood looked very solid during his stint.


Holroyd did OK, but got pulled after that knock on, didn't return other than curries hia. EDIT, JUST WATCHING THE GAME BACK IT WAS WOOD THAT CAME ON, TOO MANT MULLETS

Dufty is a frustrating player, he really is.

Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 12:11 pm  

karetaker wrote:

Guardian says 11-9 in our favour on penalties, can’t see how that’s right it felt like every set we conceded a penalty.

9 is still too many but possibly indicative of where the game is at the minute in terms of clearing up head contact and the ruck.

More frustrating to me than the penalties was where they were conceded, we seemed to constantly give away penalties in their 20m area, that coupled with a sub 70% completion rate meant we couldn’t build any pressure. Wigan & Saints are the standout teams, they build pressure well and points come off the back of that.

Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 12:47 pm  

A couple of notes from me for last night.

Powell is better than Walker.

Dufty is still a lazy defender when sweeping

Musgrove needs to get fit or get out.

Wrench is a winger.

We need to see an attacking improvement when in the opponents 20m.

I’m still waiting for any tactical differences from last season.

[Fantastic Mr Catpiss]

Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 1:14 pm  

Not sure you can say Powell was better than walker from last night, Powell played about 5 minutes at hooker

Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 1:17 pm  

I thought Walker was pretty good overall. Wasn't it Walker's kicks that resulted in the drop outs? I was in the southeast corner and couldn't tell if it was him or Drinkwater.

Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 1:59 pm  

The sending off was due to Currie's play acting. Never a Red in a million years.

The two wing incidents were far worse, with defenders trying to remove the head from the shoulders.

Really put a dampener on this game which was shaping up at the time.

[Fantastic Mr Catpiss]

Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 2:09 pm  

Septimius Severus wrote:

The sending off was due to Currie's play acting. Never a Red in a million years.

The two wing incidents were far worse, with defenders trying to remove the head from the shoulders.

Really put a dampener on this game which was shaping up at the time.

What play acting? He's got blood pouring into his eye, what would you do?

Re: Tonight’s match v Hull : Sat Feb 24, 2024 2:14 pm  

Fantastic Mr Catpiss wrote:

What play acting? He's got blood pouring into his eye, what would you do?

I think they are suggesting an RU style “blood gate” ie Currie had a bag of fake blood stashed in his shorts and at an opportune moment pulled it out and broke it above his eye to make it look like blood was gushing form a non existent wound…
given that the username suggests they are a child of Jacob Rees-Mogg anything is possible