[Kosh]

Re: Wakey : Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:02 pm  

upthecats wrote:

Grow up? Yeah, alright Dad...

A man already motionless and held by two tacklers, not expecting it takes one right on the button...and that's OK in your world?

If that had been a Wigan player on one of yours I'm sure you would be calling it very differently!

The man held motionless was trying to offload and had his arm free when Ellis hit him. Or was he supposed to stand there and watch?

This has been blown up out of all proportion. Talanoa suffered a worse hit by Ablett on Friday and no, I wasn't up in arms about it. Neither did our chairman embarrass himself on social media.

upthecats wrote:

Maybe our chairman is getting just a little peed off at the inconsistency from the disciplinary panel when we've had bans for Arona and Scruton for nothing tackles then last week a Sheffield player injures Arundel for a month with a needless cannonball tackle, clear as day on the video and gets away no case to answer..

Let's see what happens...

He needs to join the very long queue of people hacked off at the ineptitude and outright bias of the panel. It's hardly exclusive for Wakefield to suffer ridiculous decisions. Tonight's is just another example in fact.

Re: Wakey : Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:19 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

I knew you'd be on with your overtly biased opinion on the game. Fact is that wakey needed piggy backing up the field with penalites or errors from us. Other than that you struggled to make decent yardage. Other than a 20 minute or so spell when we went to sleep we completely dominated you.

Stats

Metres made

wakey 941 Hull 1377

Carries

wakey 144 Hull 170

Average gain

wakey 6.5m Hull 8.1m

Average no of players in the tackle

wakey 1.7 Hull 1.9

wakey - 1 player over 90m made in the game

Hull - 8 players ove 90m made in the game.

We dominated you and the scoreline doesn't reflect that domination due to a brief spell when our defence slackened off . Accept it or try and argue otherwise, I don't really care but facts are facts.

I'm not saying wakey didn't play well because they did but never in a million years were you the better side

How I saw it. Never ever in a million years was pritchard to Shaul forward. That would of taken the score over 50.plus the goal that was but wasn't takes it to possibly 54. So being a bit tighter for that spell really could of hit 60 odd. Either way I've never ever ever seen a team score 40odd points keep a side to 4 points in the 2nd and be anything other than dominant

Re: Wakey : Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:23 pm  

airliebird,runninglate! wrote:

How I saw it. Never ever in a million years was pritchard to Shaul forward. That would of taken the score over 50.plus the goal that was but wasn't takes it to possibly 54. So being a bit tighter for that spell really could of hit 60 odd. Either way I've never ever ever seen a team score 40odd points keep a side to 4 points in the 2nd and be anything other than dominant

Or how a team which makes less than 1000 metres in a game deserves anything but a hammering. Had our defence not gone to sleep in that 2nd 1/4 the scoreline would have been more reflective of our dominance

Re: Wakey : Wed Apr 27, 2016 8:46 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

Or how a team which makes less than 1000 metres in a game deserves anything but a hammering. Had our defence not gone to sleep in that 2nd 1/4 the scoreline would have been more reflective of our dominance

If my grandma had balls she'd be my grandad, so what's your point?

Re: Wakey : Wed Apr 27, 2016 8:53 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

Or how a team which makes less than 1000 metres in a game deserves anything but a hammering. Had our defence not gone to sleep in that 2nd 1/4 the scoreline would have been more reflective of our dominance

Tbf they could say the same about the 10 minutes in which we scored 4 tries in the first half.

Re: Wakey : Wed Apr 27, 2016 9:07 pm  

The Avenger wrote:

If my grandma had balls she'd be my grandad, so what's your point?

My point is we were dominant despite what any wakey fan might try and convince themselves. Sub 1000m gains are the things that hammerings are made of

Re: Wakey : Wed Apr 27, 2016 10:27 pm  

The Avenger wrote:

If my grandma had balls she'd be my grandad, so what's your point?

or a shemale

Re: Wakey : Thu Apr 28, 2016 9:33 pm  

Isaiah wrote:

or a shemale

She'd fit in well in Hull then!

Re: Wakey : Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:54 pm  

The Avenger wrote:

She'd fit in well in Hull then!

Last time I went out in Wakey I thought they were remaking Priscilla Queen of the Dessert!!

[Wildthing]

Re: Wakey : Sat Apr 30, 2016 8:42 am  

Good (close) wins for both our sides last night. Let's move on from this and enjoy eh?