Will be weird not having o'loughlin 13 on the back of my shirt when he hangs up his boots!!!!!!!
Matt
Lockers
-
Owd Codger
- Posts: 5628
- Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 10:20 am
Re: Lockers
Perhaps my wording about not being good enough was wrong, but some posters were intimating that the time had come for him to retire following his poor game against Huddersfield. All I was trying to say was that perhaps there were reasons for it.keptinthedarkfans wrote:Your there again looking for something thats not there. Where on the entire lockers thread as anyone said he is not good enough to be in team. All I can see is everyone wants a fit lockers in team. I personaly think his body has had enough but would love to be wrong and see him ripping it up for us.Whelley Warrior wrote:All this about him no longer being good enough to be in the team after just a couple of Super League games and no participation in pre-match friendlies. Not to mention that he may have had a few sleepless nights with the new baby.
-
keptinthedarkfans
- Posts: 1784
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:11 pm
Re: Lockers
You may be right WW but to be fair lockers was out for a lot of last season well before Baby came along.and had a full end of season to recouparate.But still not ready at start of new season.In my mind this is because the body is taking longer to heal and simple injuries become major problems both fitness wise and mentally draining.
-
Owd Codger
- Posts: 5628
- Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 10:20 am
Re: Lockers
Why don't we just wait and see what the position will be in six weeks time instead of just speculating about his fitness and future commitment to playing.keptinthedarkfans wrote:You may be right WW but to be fair lockers was out for a lot of last season well before Baby came along.and had a full end of season to recouparate.But still not ready at start of new season.In my mind this is because the body is taking longer to heal and simple injuries become major problems both fitness wise and mentally draining.
-
keptinthedarkfans
- Posts: 1784
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:11 pm
Re: Lockers
Thats a fair comment.But I Know where my money is.Whelley Warrior wrote:Why don't we just wait and see what the position will be in six weeks time instead of just speculating about his fitness and future commitment to playing.keptinthedarkfans wrote:You may be right WW but to be fair lockers was out for a lot of last season well before Baby came along.and had a full end of season to recouparate.But still not ready at start of new season.In my mind this is because the body is taking longer to heal and simple injuries become major problems both fitness wise and mentally draining.
-
Panchitta Marra
- Posts: 6134
- Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:24 pm
Re: Lockers
Was the impact on Lockers from Robinson 100% accident.
The ball came away from Lockers and Robinson didn't go after the ball, he just continued into the path of Lockers.
The ball came away from Lockers and Robinson didn't go after the ball, he just continued into the path of Lockers.
-
TrueBlueWarrior
- Posts: 6171
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 10:17 pm
Re: Lockers
Gareth Hock intentional!!Panchitta Marra wrote:Was the impact on Lockers from Robinson 100% accident.
The ball came away from Lockers and Robinson didn't go after the ball, he just continued into the path of Lockers.
Luke Robison accidental!!
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
-
Panchitta Marra
- Posts: 6134
- Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:24 pm
Re: Lockers
I have my doubts TBW, Robinson watched the ball then took his eye off it and he looked direct at Lockers before he made contact with his knee. I've looked at it again tonight after coming in from back shift and can't change my mind from that. Robinson could maybe have gone in alot heavier, but that's why I mentioned was it 100% an accident.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Gareth Hock intentional!!Panchitta Marra wrote:Was the impact on Lockers from Robinson 100% accident.
The ball came away from Lockers and Robinson didn't go after the ball, he just continued into the path of Lockers.
Luke Robison accidental!!
-
TrueBlueWarrior
- Posts: 6171
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 10:17 pm
Re: Lockers
I was being mischievous in suggesting that it is one rule for one and another for another, if it was Hock guilty but Robinson no way, he is a good guy isn't he?Panchitta Marra wrote:I have my doubts TBW, Robinson watched the ball then took his eye off it and he looked direct at Lockers before he made contact with his knee. I've looked at it again tonight after coming in from back shift and can't change my mind from that. Robinson could maybe have gone in alot heavier, but that's why I mentioned was it 100% an accident.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Gareth Hock intentional!!Panchitta Marra wrote:Was the impact on Lockers from Robinson 100% accident.
The ball came away from Lockers and Robinson didn't go after the ball, he just continued into the path of Lockers.
Luke Robison accidental!!
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
-
Panchitta Marra
- Posts: 6134
- Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:24 pm
Re: Lockers
That's me, always slow on the uptake.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:I was being mischievous in suggesting that it is one rule for one and another for another, if it was Hock guilty but Robinson no way, he is a good guy isn't he?Panchitta Marra wrote:I have my doubts TBW, Robinson watched the ball then took his eye off it and he looked direct at Lockers before he made contact with his knee. I've looked at it again tonight after coming in from back shift and can't change my mind from that. Robinson could maybe have gone in alot heavier, but that's why I mentioned was it 100% an accident.TrueBlueWarrior wrote: Gareth Hock intentional!!
Luke Robison accidental!!