Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:33 pm  

Remember Ashley Clown? oh to have him back.

Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:36 pm  

blakeysrobin wrote:

Remember Ashley Clown? oh to have him back.

Gawd,another berk.
(Clown,not you. )

Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:42 pm  

barton baird wrote:

Gawd,another berk.
(Clown,not you. )

Think Childs has to be given time off for me, we dread him as well (along with kickoff at the mo) the kid from the nationals (name alludes me) is looking like a seasoned pro next to childs.

Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 6:30 pm  

MrPhilb wrote:

I said it two years ago you fool and it still true now, with both sides having a first choice 17 Rovers would run Hull ragged

I have never had reason to get involved with you - but please on your bike - Last nights game between Hull and Cas is nothing to do with a Red and White - go and discuss your drubbing at Saints

Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 6:31 pm  

MrPhilb wrote:

I said it two years ago you fool and it still true now, with both sides having a first choice 17 Rovers would run Hull ragged

I have never had reason to get involved with you - but please on your bike - Last nights game between Hull and Cas is nothing to do with a Red and White - go and discuss your drubbing at Saints

Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 6:37 pm  

blakeysrobin wrote:

Think Childs has to be given time off for me, we dread him as well (along with kickoff at the mo) the kid from the nationals (name alludes me) is looking like a seasoned pro next to childs.

I think you mean Tim Roby. He is being developed for Super League rather than dropped in at e deep end.

Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 6:42 pm  

Staffs FC wrote:

I think it was probably the amount of possession that we gave them in penalties that ultimately meant we didn't get enough time near their line in the second half. From the beginning of the second half (wasn't counting the first) we were 7-1 down in penalties at one stage. I know you favour the ill discipline and ineptitude line which is fair enough - what I would say is that had penalties been given for the same offences more evenly we would have had better field position and won the game. A different opinion but that's my take on it.

Without seeing replays it's impossible to say, however I'd be willing to bet that if we did then most of his decisions would probably be right. What you would also likely find though is that he wasn't applying the rules consistently which is where a lot of the problems lie. Fact is he was being pedantic and we should have given him no opportunity to ping us time and time again

Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 6:44 pm  

berrigans bitch wrote:

We all said the same at the game last night, if we had Ganson last night we would have won, comfortably as well

There's no way on earth you can be certain of that.

Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 6:55 pm  

chico's nose wrote:

I'm not Saying he is bent, I am just looking for answers as to how I witnessed the worst performance I have ever seen from an offical at any sporting event.

I would love to simply put last night down to the fact that the guy is out of his depth, but some of the decisions were so baffleing it did leave me asking myself some uncomfortable questions.

As I said before, the performance last night was either incompetant and totally unacceptable or a blatant display of cheating. I stand by that remark.

For both sides I take it,or was he just officiating Hull,the penalty count will tell you different.

Re: Childs : Sat Apr 02, 2011 6:59 pm  

Not sure if anyone has actually posted the penalty count, but it was 14-13 in Castleford's favour.