Moa for Radford
Washbrook for Houghton
Calderwood obviously out of favour so don't see him coming back in until we get injuries.

Whoever planted that idea in your head obviously knows what they are talking about.

Which is rediculous.

me personally i think that hudds have a good backline with good atacking piviots with brown, robinson, hodgson, faiumuna and lunt. think that we have alot better forwards espically front row with moa, omeely, radders and dowes, going from last week they have crabtree, griffin and raleigh as props as mason is injured.my team would be
1.tansey
2.hall
3.whiting
4.yeamen
5.briscoe
6.horne
7.long
8.omeely
9.berrigan
10.radders
11.tickle
12.manu
13.fitzgibbon
subs
14.moa
15.lauaki
16.dowes
17.washbrook/houghton

Is he? Based on what, exactly? Because if you're talking about him being left out in favour of Hall I see two problems...

1. The official website said he was injured and nobody has come up with evidence to the contrary.
2. Hall is also supposed to be 'out of favour'.

Maybe people are just looking for conspiracies where none exist?

Rubbish.

By the way Dennis Moore took the team on Saturday night as Agar apparently buckled under player pressure having been told to stay away by the kit man. Radford Cusack and Dowes picked the squad on Wednesday.

Correct, my friend was speaking to Calderwood and although it may not fit in with some conspiracy theories on here he is injured, which was picked up in training..thigh

Or maybe they know something?

Thigh you say?

but but but the website says slight hamstring tear......

eh?

add not and

thats where they normally are

Play your strongest team, if Calderwood is fit then play him in front of Hall.

Well I never said he was being honest with my friend



TBF he could have said hamstring, my point was he did confirm he was injured

Well he would wouldn't he

Quote ="Robbo4"Thigh you say? but but but the website says slight hamstring tear......'" Anatomy not your strong suit? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamstring

Quote ="Robbo4"Thigh you say? but but but the website says slight hamstring tear......'" Anatomy not your strong suit? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamstring

Quote ="Kosh"Anatomy not your strong suit? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamstring'" Nobody says thigh when talking about a hamstring tear even though it is technically correct

Quote ="Kosh"Anatomy not your strong suit? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamstring'" Nobody says thigh when talking about a hamstring tear even though it is technically correct

Told you on saturday you know nowt.your reading to much into it mate.

Your the expert on that one.

I'm sure some people [ithink[/i they know something.



I'm a big fan of Occam's Razor. On the one hand we have a slight injury quite commonly picked up in training, particularly for wingers; on the other hand we have a coach playing favourites along with a conspiracy of silence and misdirection that includes the club, it's website, the player himself and his team mates.

I know which scenario Occam would have favoured.

not at all mate,i have no idea wether he was injured or not,just dont think the club would lie about it.of course i could be wrong tho.

League Express today says that Calderwood picked up a hamstring strain in training and will probably be fit for the Crusaders game.
Same team this week then in that case.

You know what, your right clubs never lie about injuries to players. I retract all previous comments and believe that Calderwood is injured. Shame he missed out really but hopefully he will be fit again soon.

Agar says in the League Express that Calderwood pulled a hamstring in training but should be back for the Crusaders game. No other injuries. Says Burnett, Moa, Turner, Lyne, Kent, Washy just not selected.

Think he would have just put Calderwood in that group if he was fit and not picked.

calm down mate i said i may be wrong,by the way sarcasm is the lowest form of wit