changes that would have won the game.

ferreira · Post by **ferreira** » Sat May 16, 2009 10:42 am

a fair reff to be honiest! that was disgraceful! should there not be some punishment for silverwood? excuses should be flowing out his bum! so dobson try shouldnt of ever happend! we didnt knock on after the hit's came flying in from tommy my god gene must of wanted to retire he was stood on the sideline like what was that!! when ever noble decided the team sheet with riddell! sam tomkins? tim smith had abit more composure.

turf · Post by **turf** » Sat May 16, 2009 12:52 pm

ferreira wrote:a fair reff to be honiest! that was disgraceful! should there not be some punishment for silverwood? excuses should be flowing out his bum! so dobson try shouldnt of ever happend! we didnt knock on after the hit's came flying in from tommy my god gene must of wanted to retire he was stood on the sideline like what was that!! when ever noble decided the team sheet with riddell! sam tomkins? tim smith had abit more composure.

1st point - Silverwood And Punishment:

That last night was the most embarrassing attempt to impersonate or try to impersonate a referee, I have ever seen, but as I said on another thread, something should definately come Silverwood's way after that farce last night (and believe me that is being generous for how bad he was last night) but won't due to the incompetent muppets at the RFL!!!!!!!!!

2nd Point - Noble Dropping S. Tomkins:

Why in the blue heck, did Noble suddenly drop S. Tomkins? We had all ready resigned ourselves to not seeing Ainiscough play last night but I was watching the players warm up and my grandad said to me, "Is Sam Tomkins playing, because I can't see him".

I replied, "If you can't see him then our dipstick of a coach has probably dropped him".

Why doesn't he drop O'Loughlin/Hock next week?!?!??

Don't forget, he loves dropping players on form!!!!!!!!

Matthew · Post by **Matthew** » Sat May 16, 2009 2:56 pm

Next week will see Tomkins return to the side and Mickey Mac dropped - just wait and see...

turf · Post by **turf** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:07 pm

Matthew wrote:Next week will see Tomkins return to the side and Mickey Mac dropped - just wait and see...

I wouldn't like to see Mickey Mac dropped to be honest, I would like to see Riddell dropped and S Tomkins and S Ainscough back into the side.

Reevezie 2.0.0.8 · Post by **Reevezie 2.0.0.8** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:19 pm

1. Decent Ref
2. Sam Tomkins instead of Riddel
3. Ainscough instead of Roberts

Why im on the subject, did anyone else see Roberts attempt to catch a highball kicked to the corner, he lucky because he tried to kick the ball whilst in the air instead of catching the blinkin thing........ :doz:

turf · Post by **turf** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:21 pm

Reevezie 2.0.0.8 wrote:1. Decent Ref
2. Sam Tomkins instead of Riddel
3. Ainscough instead of Roberts

Why im on the subject, did anyone else see Roberts attempt to catch a highball kicked to the corner, he lucky because he tried to kick the ball whilst in the air instead of catching the blinkin thing........ :doz:

Those three I would also agree with.

PS: I did see the incident you are on about Reevezie 2.0.0.8.

waterside glens · Post by **waterside glens** » Sat May 16, 2009 5:17 pm

turf wrote:
ferreira wrote:a fair reff to be honiest! that was disgraceful! should there not be some punishment for silverwood? excuses should be flowing out his bum! so dobson try shouldnt of ever happend! we didnt knock on after the hit's came flying in from tommy my god gene must of wanted to retire he was stood on the sideline like what was that!! when ever noble decided the team sheet with riddell! sam tomkins? tim smith had abit more composure.
1st point - Silverwood And Punishment:

That last night was the most embarrassing attempt to impersonate or try to impersonate a referee, I have ever seen, but as I said on another thread, something should definately come Silverwood's way after that farce last night (and believe me that is being generous for how bad he was last night) but won't due to the incompetent muppets at the RFL!!!!!!!!!

2nd Point - Noble Dropping S. Tomkins:

Why in the blue heck, did Noble suddenly drop S. Tomkins? We had all ready resigned ourselves to not seeing Ainiscough play last night but I was watching the players warm up and my grandad said to me, "Is Sam Tomkins playing, because I can't see him".

I replied, "If you can't see him then our dipstick of a coach has probably dropped him".

Why doesn't he drop O'Loughlin/Hock next week?!?!??

Don't forget, he loves dropping players on form!!!!!!!!

well said :eusa2:

Reevezie 2.0.0.8 · Post by **Reevezie 2.0.0.8** » Sat May 16, 2009 5:32 pm

turf wrote:
Reevezie 2.0.0.8 wrote:1. Decent Ref
2. Sam Tomkins instead of Riddel
3. Ainscough instead of Roberts

Why im on the subject, did anyone else see Roberts attempt to catch a highball kicked to the corner, he lucky because he tried to kick the ball whilst in the air instead of catching the blinkin thing........ :doz:
Those three I would also agree with.

PS: I did see the incident you are on about Reevezie 2.0.0.8.

LOL nice one mate, thought it was just my imagination as i had gone straight to match after 12 hour shift at work... :slee:

shaunedwardsfanclub · Sun May 17, 2009 12:23 am

Smith's charged down kick changed the game (ignoring the balls up by Silverwood). I am a great believer that the full back should be positioned behind the kicker in order to deal with such an eventuality. The same thing happened to HKR but Briscoe wes well placed to deal with it.

DaveO · Post by **DaveO** » Sun May 17, 2009 3:15 am

Matthew wrote:Next week will see Tomkins return to the side and Mickey Mac dropped - just wait and see...

Good call.

Dave

changes that would have won the game.

changes that would have won the game.

Re: changes that would have won the game.

Re: changes that would have won the game.

Re: changes that would have won the game.

Re: changes that would have won the game.

Re: changes that would have won the game.

Re: changes that would have won the game.

Re: changes that would have won the game.

Re: changes that would have won the game.

Re: changes that would have won the game.