Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 11:08 am  

A unknown superstar wrote:

Don't agree with the last bit, Talanoa has been a fantastic finisher during his Hull career. I'd go far as saying if he was a lot faster. He would be world class, I don't think I'm the only Hull fan who thinks that either.

I'm only saying that based on his finishing last night. Blew two tries by not keeping his feet out of touch.

Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 11:09 am  

meast wrote:

i am basing it on the recruitment and the good start you made after 3/4 games , your board was fairly content at that point.

apologies, i thought you had won your first 3/4 and were top after a few rounds or am i thinking of wakefield

We won our first game against you and lost 7-6 to Warrington. At that point we were fairly happy, but it soon fell off a cliff after that.

I understand that people aren't convinced about Hull just yet. It's a big jump to go from 8th to winning things in a season, we've also had a lot of false dawns before. But the signs are really positive.

We weren't as good last night as we were last week. Salford actually played pretty well last week, whereas Catalans last night were disappointing. I also felt we tweaked our style a bit. Against Salford it was all about quick play the balls, runs from dummy half and big men busting tackles. We only really started moving the ball once we got into attacking areas. Last night we showed more willingness to play in our own half and there were a lot more offloads. Whether this was a conscious decision because of the conditions and opposition or whether its just a sign of the confidence we have I'm not sure, but I thought we were good to watch last night, even if it wasnt as controlled as the week before.

Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 11:13 am  

Nothus wrote:

I'm only saying that based on his finishing last night. Blew two tries by not keeping his feet out of touch.

Tbf they were both difficult chances, and he was only an inch away with both. In fact I thought the first one was okay, thought his foot stayed in the air, but without a ground level camera looking straight down the line it was hard to tell.

Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 12:47 pm  

The touch judge had the best view of the first try and he didn't flag him in touch. ref gave a try and there was no video evidence to change that so it should have been given.
second one was not clear either way for me.

Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 1:34 pm  

gary-hfc wrote:

The touch judge had the best view of the first try and he didn't flag him in touch. ref gave a try and there was no video evidence to change that so it should have been given.
second one was not clear either way for me.

Talk about black and white tinted glasses! Clearly in touch on both occasions as the video replays showed.

[Kosh]

Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:32 pm  

roversmad wrote:

Talk about black and white tinted glasses! Clearly in touch on both occasions as the video replays showed.

Unless you've seen different replays to the ones they showed on TV last night then they didn't clearly show anything. Terrible angles used on both.

Which is the point. If the on-field ref sends it upstairs as a try the VR has to have conclusive evidence to overturn. No such evidence was shown.

Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:58 pm  

Kosh wrote:

Unless you've seen different replays to the ones they showed on TV last night then they didn't clearly show anything. Terrible angles used on both.

Which is the point. If the on-field ref sends it upstairs as a try the VR has to have conclusive evidence to overturn. No such evidence was shown.

Well, if you ignore his foot going into touch on both occasions then, no, no evidence was shown

[Kosh]

Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 4:18 pm  

roversmad wrote:

Well, if you ignore his foot going into touch on both occasions then, no, no evidence was shown

I appreciate that you only having one eye when viewing FC will give you depth perception problems, but no frame of the footage shown last night definitively shows a foot in touch for either try. The angle they showed practically guaranteed that it wouldn't due to foreshortening by the camera lens. There may well be an angle that shows what you claim but it wasn't broadcast last night.

Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 4:22 pm  

Kosh wrote:

I appreciate that you only having one eye when viewing FC will give you depth perception problems, but no frame of the footage shown last night definitively shows a foot in touch for either try. The angle they showed practically guaranteed that it wouldn't due to foreshortening by the camera lens. There may well be an angle that shows what you claim but it wasn't broadcast last night.

Aye ok then, whatever you say. You know best

Re: Hull FC : Sun Feb 14, 2016 4:29 pm  

Anyway we're getting knocked off the top by Widnes, so we can all pipe down.