Thing is, we all know how George referees a game. We all know he's a pedant. So why on earth do we keep giving him an opportunity to penalise us. We all criticise the referee but players indiscipline doesn't come under anywhere near as much scutiny.
Murrel's indiscretion cost Fax the game at Fev last year and contributed a long way to the loss yesterday.
Murrel's and others discipline was costly - as was Fax poor execution and rank bad decision making. Ged Stokes did not influence the result.

I agree with that - fair review of yesterday - a game there to be won was lost by some poor execution and wasted possession- same in any sport really got to make the most of possession!!

Can't see anyone disagreeing with that.

That pitch aint gonna help you lot this season. It was terrible. Cant believe they play football on it.

looked like it had been ploughed

My thoughts on yesterday:-

Starting with the ref, I didnt think he was any worse than usual but a few things got me at crucial stages of the game. In the space of 5 first half minutes Fev conceded 4 penalties around the PTB but never got on a team warning, in my opinion he should have put them on a warning after 3 and that would have helped the game as the momentum had swung and you couldnt blame Fev for trying to slow us down. 2nd half I thought we were hard done by when we 'forced a drop out', in my eyes the Fev player grounded the ball behind the try line and then ended up back over it before been pushed back, next tackle we were done for offside. The only other decision I can think of was the Murrell one which I didnt think was a dirty tackle it was more a case that he couldnt get there in time and he did hit the kicker on his standing leg and deserved a yellow card for mine.

Fev looked crisper than us in attack at times especially early in the game but once we got a foot hold I think we dominated them in the forwards and they were struggling at times to make yards. That said they did enough to win the game once again.

On Fax I think if you watched the video but took the tries out and had to ask someone who won the game most people would say Fax probably won it by quite some distance but unfortunately sport does not work like that. We just bombed so many chances or took the wrong option too many times. Twice on the first tackle we lost the ball trying to force a pass that was not on, now we all want to see attacking rugby but there has to be some common sense behind it as well. If Moore catches that ball in the first half we would have gone in in front but again a missed opportunity and by the time we bombed the try in the second half I think most of us could see how it was going to end.

After the fairbank break all it would have taken was one killer ball instead the ball ended up in Tangata's hands after an awful pass when it needed a ball player with the ball to provide a quick pass and when that didnt happen it just slowed the whole thing down. I said last week if we were playing a better team we would have lost by bombing chances and it happened this week.

No need for the mass panic that seems to be happening though and there was plenty of pluses to take out of the game and even season so far. Saltonstall is one who looks the part and could do a great job while Greenwood recovers from his awful injury. Mannely was fantastic at hooker especially in the first half and is another who could potentially go on to be a really good player for us this season. The forwards I thought to a man got over their opposition numbers and our defence in the second half in the middle was very very good with some massive hits. I would be more worried about our lack of tries if we were not creating chances but that is not the case, take the Moore dropped ball, the fairbank fall, and Tyrer dropping the ball over the line and there is about 18 points there which would have more than won the game. When/if we can take our chances we will run up a big score against someone.

Dewsbury next week is massive though now and a real must win game against one of our main rivals. If we can beat the teams around us im pretty sure fev will slip up when they dont have all their loan players in and we can make ground up on them. The other thing is the club can not move forward on gates of 2k against one of our main rivals, we need more people down there getting behind the team.

Radio Leeds on Monday morning....Wakefield's Joe Arundel scored the winning try for Featherstone at Halifax. Says it all really.

Does it?

I don't like DR it's a symptom of a poorly game, however it's here for the moment and you've just got to deal with it. If Jacob Fairbank had scored instead of doing a 'Devon Loch' just short of the finishing post that would have been Huddersfields Jacob Fairbank scored a 60 yard try blah blah

Let it go, Sunday's loss was down to us, nothing else.

Yer we did but having 4 players from a team in a higher league DOES help!
Jacob is on loan by the way not DR

Jacob is on loan by the way not DR'"

There's a big difference.

There's a big difference.'"

D/R v Loan.
D/R means if we find ourself short of players who can't step up to the mark or we get injuries means we can go to one club and ask for replacements.
Loan, if we find ourself short of players who can't step up to the mark or we get injuries means we can go to any club and ask for replacements.
Not sure there is a lot of difference.
So far we haven't gone down the D/R route but have got a player on loan who initially intimated that he did not want to be here. (his performances suggest other wise) Apparently we are looking at least one more, before Richard goes down the D/R route
One thing to bear in mind, we have a new coach who had little say, if any, about his playing squad, basically it's Karl's team. If Richard needs D/R or Loans then he has my backing.
O'h as long as he doesn't come to me for a loan.



Just my opinion.

:1i383ovp

Go on then explain away the BIG difference.

P.s By the way I didn't write, [i:1i383ovp'Jacob is on loan by the way not DR'[/i
Go on then, I will. In Fax's case if we choose to loan a player it is our choice of player on our terms. If it's DR its the parent/SL club to decide who they want to go out to their junior partners and on their terms....Oh yes it is! Does anyone think that HKR woke up one day and had a sudden bright idea....Let's help Halifax out for some unknown reason. But it's more than just about Fax it's about the future of RL. All this DR rubbish is about us, us; us. The us being the SL clubs looking after number one but if they are allowed to get away with it there won't be anyone left beneath them to provide the all important roots of the game. And then they would just have to play with each other four times a season like Scottish football does and look at the mess that league is in.

Okay, let's strip out the rant part of your last post, which for the 100th time most people on here agree with. Even though IMO your view of DR is rather simplistic.

In terms of you explaining what the BIG difference was I'm not so sure you sealed the deal fella.

Do you think Paul Anderson got out of bed one morning and thought you know what I'll give Richard a ring at they Shay and help him out by offering him another forward. It's quite clear that Jacobs been shipped out by Huddersfield and they can call him back whenever they feel like it, I'd be surprised if he lets Jacob play at Barrow TBH.

The clubs taking on a loan gets a player who has been either frozen out, out of form or coming back from injury.....ie feeding off scraps. Like DR all loans do is paper over the cracks and stop another player from within the ranks getting a game and before you know it they're back with their parent club or somewhere else along the M62.

Plusses and minuses for both teams as I saw it:
Fev plusses: Scrambling defence and team spirit excellent. Looked by far the more slicker and more dangerous side when we moved the ball wide. Had far fewer attacking opportunities yet scored four tries & had two more under the posts disallowed - Moore's offside one was the correct decision but Bostock clearly looked to have grounded the ball over the line (witness the Fev players close to him who immediately celebrated simultaneously) but Stokes seemed to be unsighted. Sykes looked more comfortable at centre and could have had a huge game if he'd been given the ball on a couple of occasions when seeming to be in a gap. Away support in good voice once again given we'd shipped 40 at home the week before.
Fev minusses:
Still too many penalties conceded and dropped balls in our own territory (two from kick offs!) gifting Fax good attacking positions. First time in a while against Fax that we haven't dominated the collisions (though Wood made consistent yards after contact). Kicking game up and down. Allowed too many offloads. Can understand the decision to play Sharp at FB again, but Hitchcox looks a bit wasted on the wing given how threatening he's looked in previous games.
Fax positives:
Forwards more than held their own, especially in defence where line speed looks improved from previous years, and the offload game (especially in the first half) was by far their most productive attacking tactic. Fairbank is a very good player at this level and Callahane adds some grunt to the pack and looks a decent signing. Saltonstall looks lively and should cause defences problems if he can get some service (though his attempts to buy penalties when playing the ball will soon get sussed out and after giving him two penalties Stokes wasn't falling for the really obvious milking attempt for the third one). Maneely looks an upgrade at hooker.
Fax negatives:
Two tries a very poor return for so many opportunities in the opposition 20, especially as one of them was a gift from a poor kick. Looked more likely to lose ground than gain it when trying any sort of passing movement, everything very pedestrian. Still seems to be the same grind-them-down game plan as in previous seasons, will be productive against lesser teams in the League but more needed against the better defenses (and Bradford had opened Fev up at will the week before). Late hits proved expensive in 2nd half (thought Murrell unlucky to be sin binned but there were two or three other late pushes on Irwin, Moore & Godinet and the apparent attempt to harrass our pivots backfied in terms of penalties, though it did get Moore off the field).

Well fella, It wasn't a rant, it was an explanation as asked for. Fairly simplistic, yes, but I could go on all day snd I'm sure that would only bore you. I don't think for one minute PA woke up one morning and decided to offer us Jacob. What I do believe happened was that we decided to ask Huddersfield for the loan. Also as a loan deal Hudds wouldn't be able to call the player back when they feel like it. Unless of course the loan deal was agreed on Huddersfield's terms. DR/Loans....totally different.

No further questions M'lud

Watching on to see how RM responds to this as he will be aware of the implications of DR / Loans and the rest.

Possibly a test of his character, will he put the principles of the bigger issue first and keep away from DR or will he choose to go down that route as some kind of speculative short term fix?

I would think it will be the latter if it means staying competitive but it's a guess.

We need to hold our nerve and keep improving in all areas, on and off the field, with the players we have and what we can bring in, its in our hands, we need only be concerned with what we do to move forward. I don't see this system being as important once the new structure settles down.

The Club is appearing healthier than for years, keep positive.

Well said

With only two half backs left RM will be looking to add to the squad, question remains, from where.

It warms the cockles of my heart to see you happier these days.

For the time being!

Well he hasn't immediately jumped on the DR boat so that's a good sign I'd say.