Anderson says a point lost. When we lost the lead.. And deservably so it was defiantly a point won. Catalans determination was superb.
I'm actually very happy after this weekend.

Individual errors and brain farts cost us the game along with Catalans good play.

Murphy, McGillvary, Broughy and Wood stood out for me.

Ferres looked dangerous before he hobbled off.

Didn't think we was a team people bothered about but it was have a dig at the Giants day yesterday so we are obviously turning a few heads.

I believe Hughes has played every game (16) and has given away 8 penalties so again the stats do not back up your comments.
The two that stand out on penalties are Wardle 15 and Huby 13. Also Brough with 10 is very poor for a half back and i bet a fair percentage of his are for dissent.

Taking a quick look at the stats on the Super League site, they seem to support my argument:
Hughes gives twice as many penalties away as Bruno on average
Hughes misses 5 times as many tackles as Bruno per game
Hughes makes nearly twice as many errors as Bruno
Average metres made is about the same as is the average gain

Stats can be made to support most arguments as we take those we want to use but I go back to I don't think there is much between the players so it makes no sense to me to play Hughes ahead of Bruno.

For Anderson to have him as a main stay in the side since signing, he must have good reason. It may not be obvious to the layman but there is quite clearly a reason for a ex pro and professional coach of good standing to think he's better.

With reference (not a dig) to the previous post "Stats can be made to support most arguments" But how many more minutes has he played and against which opposition?, these would be mitigating circumstances with regards 'the stats' I would imagine.

I'm a big fan of Lawrence but I also think Hughes has been very good for us too, by swapping one for the other what do you get really? The difference would be negligible other than ones from this side of the pennines. I'd love a team full with Hudds lads but we haven't the quality to do that. That seems to be some peoples reason for having Bruno in the side over Hughes, but Anderson quite obviously has other(s) and in him we have to trust for the time being. And to be honest 2nd row is something we have a bit of wealth in. Its other areas we lack the dynamics to make a difference at times.

I agree with both your main points - we need to trust Anderson with his selections and we certainly have issues to resolve that are far higher priority than the Hughes v. Bruno debate - but I was just outlining my view on the information I have and from what I've watched (which is nothing compared to PA, I'm happy to admit) why I'd have Bruno over Hughes.

Well we was winning comfortably in the first half, totally dominant! Infact the game could have been over if we got the video ref decisions. The first one where wardle was judged to have shoulder charged is abit of a joke !
Also when connor had the line begging but failed to pick the ball up off the ground



2nd half was poor from us, knock ons and penalties gave catalans too much ball and they got a roll on. yet again though if murphy would have put mcgillvary over earlier on then the game would have been put to bed so we only have ourselves to blame for throwing it away.

At the end it felt like a win with the spectacular try from mcgillvary and brough touch line conversion


(note how most neutral fans were willing catalans to win and booing brough)

but on reflection it was really a point lost, at least warrington lost and failed to gain on us in the league.

BIG games coming up now which will prob decide if we can get that top 4 spot.

for me what we get is this - We get our LOCAL lad - who is willing to put his body on the line for his hometown club, instead of a disillusioned player wondering what he needs to do to get in front of a youngster who wouldn't get a look in at wigan........... we get to KEEP a player who will be better value for money than many others who offer the same as he does (and perhaps in many instances less as he can fill in nicely at centre), we don't develop a player for a rival team, and we get other LOCAL lads thinking its worth signing for Giants........
For me the issue is wider than which of those two players play.

I believe Anderson will be picking the team on ability rather than birthplace, and as I said it would be great to have a team full of Huddersfield players, but its certainly no reason to pick a player.

Its sounds like I'm arguing for Hughes inclusion but I'm not, I see no reason to drop him but also have no idea why Bruno is not in, l guess I'm arguing for Andersons judgement, he's in a better position than us to suggest who's worth a place. I don't rate Grix this season personally and l often wonder why he's been selected over others, but I understand there are arguments for and against him too, but the choice is that of the coaches.

We as fans have an affinity to team that the coach won't have, unless a fan himself, which may border on sentiment at times and theres no room for sentiment when picking a team I'm afraid.

In the end theres only one opinion that can be measured in terms of results and thats the one of the coaches.

Maybe someone should ask a member of the coaching team for a answer?

bruno and hughes should both be in for me, but for who? maybe mullally? but then neither of them are props.wardle? murphy? ta'ai?
i like lawrence, he is a consistently solid performer, hard working, not flashy, just get's his job done in a quiet way, as does hughes, who i think has done fine

In terms of the Hughes vs Bruno debate I will add that I don't really see what Hughes adds over what we already have. Not a world beater and unlike when Mossop was with us would not be bothered whether he stays or not. Would certainly not be a first choice for me just OK to fill the void when injuries arise.
As for Bruno he is a consistent performer and whilst if being really picky he offers about the same in attack he is defensively much better in my opinion and we look more solid when he is on the field.
Makes for great debate I suppose as everyone has an opinion.

As for the game we far too often lack the ability, desire, game sense or whatever to close a game out. Well done for Catalans for their comeback as they had their own injuries and errors from the first half to overcome. Carney, Henderson and Dureau took control where we just never seem to have the quality at times. Add to that the pace of Pellisier and they got us scrabbling backwards.
Really disappointed at the final result after dominating the first half but super relieved to have sneaked the draw at the end. Can't fault our effort but we lack the guile I am afraid. Broughy kicked too much in the second half that invited them to run back at us too much. Game is all about momentum and we failed to maintain that second half with silly offloads, penalties and lack of kick chase pressure.
Makes the Wigan game interesting especially as that is followed by Wire. Our final place finish will depend on those two games now prior to the Super 8 games and could define our season.

A couple of observations:

We should have won but did not, ignoring VR decisions we blew 3 tries, Ferres should have dived to slide over on the damp surface, Connor should have scored and Murphy should have put Jerry in, that is 3 easy scores blown and the game would have been out of site.

Second point Bruno v Hughes, Bruno is the better loose forward and Hughes the better second row imo. I would have both in the 17.

Finally, Mullally, Crabtree and Robbo on at the same time does not work all have their strengths but there were holes up the middle with that combo which were not there with Koppy, Huby and Cruze

on the hughes v lawrence debate, they play different positions, lawrence is up the middle tackling which has now been taken by ferres, ferres is now injured so could very well see him return in that position... he was battling with bailey for the same position last season up the middle.

Hughes runs out wide like wardle on the other side and i think hughes has gone well for us, very solid in defence...not bulldozing forward outwide but who is for us?! maybe wardle on the odd occasion but its a new position for him.

be good to get cudjoe back this sunday! dont think connor has done enough to stay ahead of him, a few flashes of brilliance but quite a few mistakes...still learning though.

hughes came here to add some strike after chan left. our main problem in attack only ferris and wardle look like making brakes a couple are good bulldozes . sorry to say we are more a one man band stop brough job done

easier said than done though hey

https://www.facebook.com/RLBanter/video ... 487133442/ This is the challenge that Murphy has been charged grade c for!!! Really???

https://www.facebook.com/RLBanter/video ... 487133442/ This is the challenge that Murphy has been charged grade c for!!! Really???

Ridiculous! The games gone soft everyone knows Murphy is not a dirty player and it was a hard hit unfortunately Tonga was on the end of it no malice or intent to injure there

Both arms around the player, not a shoulder charge. for me shoulder doesn't hit face, face hits shoulder as he tries to step he dips down.
I reckon it's worth challenging this- if he fails we deal with it.

same with grix, to me they just looked like fair but aggressive challenges, neither was a shoulder charge in terms of they both had their arms around the opponent and unfortunately contact was made with the head, which i think is the issue here...not so much the actual challenges but the fact that contact with the head was made...to me, both looked like accidental contact, but we will see

both have EGP too

You could argue that Wardle was more culpable than Grix, his arms remained down as he hit Escare, Grix was second man in technically and only hit as he did due to the initial impact of Wardle. The Murph one is a bad injury but harsh, he can't compensate for the the attackers movement in a split second.

Murphy has an argument to challenge it

Grix went in with the shoulder and should just make the egp

Can't believe Smurph's been charged. Totally fluke accident, it's a contact sport, accidents happen, did Smurph show any intent of deliberately going high or deliberately using the shoulder ???
We'll see far, far worse incidents (sometimes meant, sometimes not) than this at the weekend with no action taken. Think they're taking the Mickey with this

Smurph been found not guilty. That will upset the troll from earlier!

Thats twice Murphy been found not guilty of breaking two players jaws!

were you just on the Childs thread in VT claiming that any deliberate contact with the head is a red?!?! but as soon as its one of yours its not. i see how it works....

i will let you off, wasnt you. apologies =)