: Sat May 23, 2009 1:20 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

The most depressing thing was that once Salford scored it seemed inevitable that they would win. Never for one moment did we look as if we could comeback.

Really this was a match we should have won without playing particularly well. We should have scored on at least three of the plays where we lost the ball over their line. For the first hour Salford defended extremely well. However there always appeared to be a fragility about our defense in the middle of the park.

After 14 games including the cup we've had two very good wins, two good wins and 10 disappointing performances. If the Leeds/St Helens performances reflect a realistic level of performance for the team, then there is something badly wrong with the attitude of the squad.

Alternatively those were freak results and the current league table does not lie.

that's more accurate

: Sat May 23, 2009 6:44 pm  

the only way to cheer yourself up as a hull fan is to come on here and read your comments ,thank fook mac turned us down

at least we can point to the fact we have about 8/9 players out ,u look like a complete overall is needed we just need a scrum half

: Sat May 23, 2009 6:54 pm  

TOMMO2 wrote:

Im not trolling at all here and must admit that i havnt seen many bulls' games this year but what the hell has happened to Deacon??

Tonight he seemed completely disinterested and went missing for the most of the game. I used to really rate him but after tonights showing i would say he was miles off where he used to be.

Tonight wasnt the most spectacular of games but im obviosuly delighted solly have won on the other hand though you went over our line 4 times and lost the ball with the line open- obvious statement of the year but what a difference that makes- you score a couple of them and everyone's saying what a solid performance/win tonight was for you.

Probably as sensible a post as anybody's so far.

The way i see it, we have shot ourselves in the foot yet again, but not quite the same way as usual. On this occasion, we pretty much blasted Salford off the park, and there was nothing they could do about it.

The problem was, WE could do something about it. I think we actually got over their line 6 or 7 times but contrived somehow not to score any of them. Now, RL is a game of momentum, and if a team manages to get on a roll, it can and often does result in an easy looking win. BUT you do need to get the points on the board when you are on a roll. Every time you don't, it is a psychological blow to you, and a boost to your opponents.

As I say, we bombed tries one way or another at least half a dozen times.

(Including a very weird effort where Lynch scored, as far as I could see the in goal judge (whose sole job it is) was happy, but the try was chalked off. )

What's the point of all this? Well, a few:-

1. Once again, it was our own catalogue of mistakes, and lack of respect for the ball, which is the thing that ultimately cost us the game. I have no doubt at all about this. We have played some shocking rugby some times this season - but this wasn't one of those times. Our attack - despite many attacks of dropsy - still did the business and repeatedly got down the field and crossed the line. It is not being stupid or optimistic to point out that any one or two of those scores could have changed the result. (I was going to say, could have changed the course of the game, but in fact at that stage it was pretty much a one-way course).

2. While we continue to infuriate by the sheer weight of dropped ball, nevertheless we showed up pretty well tonight. We looked a fair team which is devoid of confidence and nervous as fsck. The coup de grace was the embarrassing chip by Deacon at the end - WTF? A panicking seal could nhave done a better job with the ball.

3. I'm not sure about Salford's "golden spell" where they put the match away in about 10 minutes - at the time I didn't think it was down to bad defence, seemed more a purple patch by Salford - they got on a bit of a roll and the difference was they put the points on the board, which in turn breeds confidence in them and in turn demoralises us after all our missed chances, and so it mushrooms. But i didn't think our defence over the 80 minutes was bad at all. There was plenty of effort.

4. I'm not sure we had any "distracted" players this time out. Platt is being singled out unfairly again, he did not have a perfect game but I reckon overall he played well and made a positive contribution. Deacon was better, though the kicking just aisn't there, and as for that final effort . . .
I'm not sure why people would criticise Langley. He's had some indifferent games but i thought that may have been one of his best this season. Salford did seem to smother Menzies all night though - he didn't seem like the same guy. Is he carrying an injury? Him not influential, and a very average game from Newton (who looked to be struggling a lot of the time) was not helped by another curate's egg from Jeffries though. That is what you might call our 4 main supposed playmakers while not exactly playing "badly", all playing at no better than 6 or 7 out of 10. Yet still we created all those chances.

[/quote]...you went over our line 4 times and lost the ball with the line open- obvious statement of the year but what a difference that makes- you score a couple of them and everyone's saying what a solid performance/win tonight was for you.[/quote]

Worth repeating, from the opposition. I'm not happy - at all - that we basically frittered away another game. But I'd be more worried if we weren't creating the chances. The question remains whether these players are good enough to play half a season making no more than "normal" handling errors and stop pi55ing away good scoring chances on so many weekends. You'd have to say the omens after half a season are not good but I live in hope.

: Sat May 23, 2009 7:03 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

I'm not sure why people would criticise Langley. He's had some indifferent games but i thought that may have been one of his best this season.

As I said, there's no way you can criticise his defence. He never seems to struggle in that side of his game.

However last night, I was deliberately watching Langley. In the last few games I'd thought he was poor in attack, so I kind of made a point to watch him specifically, to see if I was just not noticing good things (as can easily be the case).

Sadly, all it did was confirm my original thoughts that in attack, he is doing nothing at all. If the game was on tv, I'd have recommended watching the replay and watching him particularly, as I did. He offered absolutely nothing in attack.

However in no way do I think he's the only one doing this, just one that seems to have stood out for me this season.

As far as the rest of your post goes though, I think you're fairly spot on with the lot. I fully agree that Platt is getting singled out unfairly when, apart from the mistake he made from the 40-20 last night, I didn't think he was that bad.
Also agree with us making the chances and just not finishing them. In fact, I sent a couple of texts at half time and a little into the second half to the tune of "we're all over them, we've had all the possession, the game is pretty much played in their half, we're just not finishing it off".


Oh, and regarding the in-goal touch judge, I was complaining about that a little at the game. Not because I thought it was a try or anything, as I was at the wrong side to see if it was or not. But how the touch judge at the side seemed to somehow have a better view than the bloke stood two yards in front of it, I'll never know. Either one was over-ruled, or the bloke stood in-goal was completely and totally useless, coz at the end of the day, those rulings are exactly what he's there for.

: Sat May 23, 2009 9:35 pm  

Regarding the Lynch disallowed try, I thought Salford had a fair call for obstruction anyway despite it being disallowed for a knock on. Koppy certainly appeared to obstruct some of the Salford defenders.

: Sun May 24, 2009 12:31 pm  

Bully_Boxer wrote:

Regarding the Lynch disallowed try, I thought Salford had a fair call for obstruction anyway despite it being disallowed for a knock on. Koppy certainly appeared to obstruct some of the Salford defenders.

We were stood in the corner and had a similar view to the touch judge who disallowed it and it was pretty clear that he lost the ball.