Micky Mac

[KOOCH]

All I can say other than what I said in response to Kol's post is that in a reasonable conversation with four saints supporters on the way to the car park.Is that they did not agree with Micky Mac's sending off.All agreed it was a tad late and he had momentum.Now that for me coming from stains fans speaks volumes in itself.They rather slated L.M.Scarsbrooke.Of which one elderly gentleman said he was nothing better than a thug.Consistency from ref's was the main topic of our conversation and that they hoped to meet us in the Grand Final where upon I reminded them that we would make it six and out.I have read many comments mine included about the reffing standards and lack of consistency.Why then does it turn into personal attacks ie Micky Mac.Will those doubters and slaters stand tall and recant those opinions if we do win the grand final with Micky in the side? Will you bloody hell! Give me Micky Mac over Roby any day of the week.Micky is in a similar vein as Terry Newton and nowt wrong with that.

[OJ]

For me he's been brilliant this year but seems to have been pulled up a few times recently by refs and he could do without getting a bad boy reputation. I like his growling determined kind of aggresion but like Gaz Hock he needs to be able to control that aggresion.

Was talking to a Wire fan this morning who wanted to know what happened last night and after a chat about various things he commented that Saints managed to wind us up, particularly Mossop and Hock, and that was a major factor in beating us and I reckon he was right. In the next matches we can expect (a) teams to niggle at us and make us lose our cool and (b) Sam to be bombed to death.

Do we not have a sport's psychologist? If we have it's time he put some overtime in and much as Sam is a brilliant player I do wish he would stop arguing and shouting at the ref - one thing he will never, ever do is make a ref change his mind so keep quiet Sam, take decisions on the chin and let your talent do the talking

[Kittwazzer]

Warrior in Brum. You have made just 32 posts in 5 years. Its not enough.

I want to hear more from you. You speak our language and I'm sure many on here will back me up on that!

As for Roby/MM. Its like comparing Tom Brown with Flashman. You might want Tom Brown dating your daughter but not playing in your pack!

[medlocke]

stated the last couple of seasons that he was a knob and would lose us games to only be given the usual attitude by certain members, i guess i was right, a good job it was a nothing game, we should bring in Diskin and use brain dead off the bench :exc:

[Richymac]

Dunno but the way I saw it he was committed to the tackle and probs warranted a yellow at most and I am a qualified ref

[Kittwazzer]

Dunno but the way I saw it he was committed to the tackle and probs warranted a yellow at most and I am a qualified ref

But Medlocke is a qualified genito-urinary specialist!

[Shark Sam]

Committed...possibly, late...yes...but round his head...absolutely!! We can argue the toss all week about being committed etc but it was way too high anyway! If he'd been late and hit him round his legs would we be having this conversation?!! Sending off whichever way it gets dressed up!

[Raging Penguin]

The main issue for me is the lack of consistency, which does make the suggestion of an agenda in play. Why does it seem so difficult to have (or want) a transparent system. It all ultimately seems counter productive as eventually the fans will be put off and yes i understand there are many conclusions i am jumping to here.

[Shark Sam]

It was late...it was high...it was unnecessary...no defence whatsoever! If there is one I think we are being a bit blinkered!!

[KOOCH]

It was late...it was high...it was unnecessary...no defence whatsoever! If there is one I think we are being a bit blinkered!!

Yes it was late and it was high.But the point that is quite often raised is the consistency or lack of from refs.Example Paul Woods round house seen by all and sunder.What was the outcome? nowt!We have seen the blatant bias from refs over many years but nothing ever changes.What is going to happen when Micky Mac meets the judiciary pane? It's simple is it not.Banned!Not going to argue if that's the case but did we see the same from the judiciary when Paul Woods stood before them? Did we hell!A head high shot is a head high shot ever day of the week and should be censured by every ref on every player not some refs on some players.This is not just a case of arguing if he was guilty or not it is also down to the interpretation of the same refs applying different rules when certain teams are being officiated.And in my book that is not the case.But some comments on here about Micky simply do not deserve a reply.