Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 7:31 pm  

Trinity1315 wrote:

Another blow. Not just losing but being thrashed ! remind me who was near the top and the one at the bottom? I'm gobsmacked. We simply are not top three stuff .

Personally I would have gone for Hampshire to the halves and left Max at FB as both have excelled there in recent weeks, but I aren't the coach and have to accept the coach's decision.
Not blaming that for this shambles.
Perhaps in future contracts there should be some financial incentive to win!

It seems no matter what player comes in, we at Wakefield have an inherently built in 'self destruct button'.
I've lost track of the times over the past 40/50 years that we've fallen to pieces when a challenge comes along. Today's was a modest challenge of beating the leagues minnow. God help us at Saints.

Me too. I don't know why Chester will ditch max at the first opportunity. Hampshire would have done a great job at 7 with max at FB

Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 7:33 pm  

Wakefield City wrote:

Supported us long then?

Up the Trin

I think it's understandable that we all feel very let down today

Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 7:48 pm  

Ok, Max was only dropped today,but I hope this isn't the start of another anti MJ campaign from within that we witnessed in the recent past. He has shown his more than usefulness in recent games so how could we possibly leave him out when we are so starved of playing personnel. Unless, of course, he is carrying an injury. He's got to be back for Liverpool.

Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 8:26 pm  

bellycouldtackle wrote:

A group of our fans were a disgrace that day, I hope they never show their faces again at a RL match.

Well a group of our players were a bloody disgrace today. The missus nearly had a photo opportunity of me taking my replica shirt off and throwing it on the pitch rather than a cushion.

Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 9:10 pm  

Trinity1315 wrote:

Another blow. Not just losing but being thrashed ! remind me who was near the top and the one at the bottom? I'm gobsmacked. We simply are not top three stuff .

Personally I would have gone for Hampshire to the halves and left Max at FB as both have excelled there in recent weeks, but I aren't the coach and have to accept the coach's decision.
Not blaming that for this shambles.
Perhaps in future contracts there should be some financial incentive to win!

It seems no matter what player comes in, we at Wakefield have an inherently built in 'self destruct button'.
I've lost track of the times over the past 40/50 years that we've fallen to pieces when a challenge comes along. Today's was a modest challenge of beating the leagues minnow. God help us at Saints.

Couldnt believe max was dropped and ben played firstly max been really impressive and ive seen nothing to suggest ben is sl standard secondley miller and hampshire played well together towards
End of last season but we dont see what goes off in training.and that wasnt the reason today..personally think its a mixture of things but i trust the coaching staff will put it right

Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 9:30 pm  

I know nerves are raw after another shambles in the big city, but its a 17 man game so it’s no good picking on anyone in particular ,doesn’t matter who was brought in or left out of today’s game as it wouldn’t have made an iota of difference as the attitudes of the players that went down was all wrong.
My heart sank when I saw the half time score line but to be honest it didn’t shock me as we all know wakey have had a way over the years of capitulating spectacularly .This has happened throughout the last decades that I have watched them and that legacy is still alive and well unfortunately.No matter who’s coached us over the years we have always had the ability to implode when least expected and rise above when all seems lost ,never a dull moment being a wakey fan that’s for sure .

Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 9:36 pm  

Trinityknight wrote:

Injuries come about fatigue and its clear we aint fit from the fact we dont play for 80 mins

You seem to have missed the many posts regarding witnessing first hand on here re tackles on our players which have resulted in injuries - again I say that they have had nothing to do with fatigue.

Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 9:41 pm  

Today's debacle in London indicates perfectly why Trinity cannot raise their attendances. Obvious I know, but continuity of good, results is what is needed to bring old and new faces to the terraces.. We find it nigh on impossible to put a run of more than two or three wins together. It would be typical for us to give Leeds their fifth win of the season.

Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 9:47 pm  

BarnsleyGull wrote:

You seem to have missed the many posts regarding witnessing first hand on here re tackles on our players which have resulted in injuries - again I say that they have had nothing to do with fatigue.

And when a player is fatigued bodies act different thats a fact if you knew anything..the joints muscles etc all become weaker and its the postion players sre getting into for these injuries not all injuies are directed to fatigue no but many are do you not see most clubs are struggeling with injuries this comes with less interchanges snd speeding up of game ie shot clock..if you think where a fit team then fsir where all entitled to opinions dont mean your right or im right..one thing is for certain we rarley play for 80 mins.

Re: 19 for London : Sat May 18, 2019 10:40 pm  

Ok then....this could be interesting....

Which of the current players we have out injured, became injured because of fatigue?