Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:47 pm  

Fair play to Agar. I don't wanna focus on each individual call. But overall, Child ruined what could've been a cracking game.

It's not like him to lose his head like this but he's justified. Would hope TM might back him up a bit too.

Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:47 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Conspiracy theory. Kath wants rid of him, finally, but they live next door to each other so doesn't want the awkward conversation. She pays Childs to put in the display of his life and push Agar over the edge, winds Agar up by agreeing it's the worst reffing performance of 50 years and tells him to crack on and speak his mind. Agar then gets a ban from the RFL. Kath rings McNamara on speed dial. Job done.

no chance she ain't that clever to come up with a plan like that

Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:48 pm  

ditchley16 wrote:

hull were beaten by ref tonight not cas.he wasnt incompetent, he was biased.worst display of refereeing ive seen in 40 years of watching the game.no wonder rugby league is a joke .

DISAGREE.

Child wasn't biased. He was and is incompetent though.

Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:48 pm  

Well I for one am glad that Agar has sounded off. The club will no doubt get a fine but sometimes things have to be said. I don't think there was a supporter at the ground tonight who wasn't totally bewildered by that refereeing performance.

Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:49 pm  

Young Faithfull wrote:

Crap for both teams but gave the game to Cas with the worst decision i may have ever seen, when Chase knocked on clearly and he gave a steal even though there was only one Hull defender on him so even if he did steal it it's still only a one on one, making it play on. They then went and scored from the resulting kick.

Wrong,he only gave it after consulting the touch judge,who was in a much better position to see the incident.

Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:49 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

If Kath really was stalking the MC, I can see him putting a complaint in on Hull's behalf.

That really is the stuff of nightmares

Crikey didn't think of that.

Gonna have a nightmare thinking about that now

Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:49 pm  

jacko1 wrote:

no chance she ain't that clever to come up with a plan like that

You don't know her do you

Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:50 pm  

Towns88 wrote:

Fair play to Agar. I don't wanna focus on each individual call. But overall, Child ruined what could've been a cracking game.

It's not like him to lose his head like this but he's justified. Would hope TM might back him up a bit too.

would be a nice guesture but cant see it happening. If agar gets a ban for his comments next time id like him to run on the pitch and flatten the childs lol... he would probably give a knock on or something

Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:50 pm  

Towns88 wrote: Fair play to Agar. I don't wanna focus on each individual call. But overall, Child ruined what could've been a cracking game. It's not like him to lose his head like this but he's justified. Would hope TM might back him up a bit too. Matterson does back him up which speaks volumes. http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... ml&BID=480

Towns88 wrote: Fair play to Agar. I don't wanna focus on each individual call. But overall, Child ruined what could've been a cracking game. It's not like him to lose his head like this but he's justified. Would hope TM might back him up a bit too. Matterson does back him up which speaks volumes. http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... ml&BID=480

Re: Childs : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:51 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

You don't know her do you

Thankfully NO