Wakefield trinity
- the machine
- Super League Player
- Posts: 10144
- Joined: 08 Jan 2012, 21:21
- Twitter: @dphartshorne
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Allowing hurrell to run 50 metres upfield to put em in DG territory is what lost em the game
"I can accept failure. Everyone fails at something, but I cannot accept not trying"
Michael Jordan
Michael Jordan
Re: Wakefield trinity
Yes that was the build up to the incident. To be fair think Pitts was hard done to.the machine wrote: ↑14 May 2021, 22:03Allowing hurrell to run 50 metres upfield to put em in DG territory is what lost em the game
COYF!
- the machine
- Super League Player
- Posts: 10144
- Joined: 08 Jan 2012, 21:21
- Twitter: @dphartshorne
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Me too,but allowing leeds to get up field that easily put em under pressure to come up with somethingNobody wrote: ↑14 May 2021, 22:15Yes that was the build up to the incident. To be fair think Pitts was hard done to.the machine wrote: ↑14 May 2021, 22:03Allowing hurrell to run 50 metres upfield to put em in DG territory is what lost em the game
"I can accept failure. Everyone fails at something, but I cannot accept not trying"
Michael Jordan
Michael Jordan
Re: Wakefield trinity
Wakefield doing it tough, with no recognised hooker. Workhorse Ashurst played at nine for most of second half. You can’t knock them for effort but without a regular 1, 6 and 9 they are always going to behind the eight ball. Thought Westerman was outstanding for Wakey all game. I really feel for Chris Chester though. He seems like such a nice genuine bloke and he looked like a broken man at the end. I thought the way Jenna Brooks questioned him about his position in the interview after the game was a bit out of order to be honest.
-
lurcher Verified
- Super League Player
- Posts: 10676
- Joined: 19 Aug 2010, 23:25
- Location: bridlington
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
thought pitts was unlucky as he probably didn't realise the tackle was complete. would like to see the replay of hurrells run as arundel looked to be tripped as he went for the initial tackle
jo brand is eddie warings love child
Re: Wakefield trinity
Some turnip on Facebook thinks Westerman is overweight and unfit, can't make my mind up if there taking proverbial or not.daytona wrote: ↑14 May 2021, 22:45 Wakefield doing it tough, with no recognised hooker. Workhorse Ashurst played at nine for most of second half. You can’t knock them for effort but without a regular 1, 6 and 9 they are always going to behind the eight ball. Thought Westerman was outstanding for Wakey all game. I really feel for Chris Chester though. He seems like such a nice genuine bloke and he looked like a broken man at the end. I thought the way Jenna Brooks questioned him about his position in the interview after the game was a bit out of order to be honest.
COYF!
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1886
- Joined: 22 Jun 2012, 16:48
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Got to agree the interview with Chester was really turning the knife.
It was obvious he was hurting.
Fair play to the lad for agreeing to be interviewed.
It was obvious he was hurting.
Fair play to the lad for agreeing to be interviewed.
-
- League One Player
- Posts: 2986
- Joined: 21 Dec 2014, 00:40
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Definitely agree. Fair play to him, also, for not telling Jenna to [REMOVED] off! - she was bang out of order in my opinion.casjunction wrote: ↑14 May 2021, 22:52 Got to agree the interview with Chester was really turning the knife.
It was obvious he was hurting.
Fair play to the lad for agreeing to be interviewed.
-
- League One Player
- Posts: 2986
- Joined: 21 Dec 2014, 00:40
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Tripped was my thoughts too. Pitt’s definitely unlucky, a 50/50 call that Hicks really should have just let that go and told Leeds to play the ball. Don’t think it would have altered the result as Gale would probably have put the drop goal over anyway.
-
- League One Player
- Posts: 3611
- Joined: 10 Jan 2018, 15:27
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Had a look at the Hurrell/Arundel incident and nothing in to be fair. However, I thought Wakey were shafted throughout the game, thought Leeds got away with a lot. Usually I enjoy seeing Wakey in demise, but not when the refereeing is so bad.derbystiger wrote: ↑14 May 2021, 23:01Tripped was my thoughts too. Pitt’s definitely unlucky, a 50/50 call that Hicks really should have just let that go and told Leeds to play the ball. Don’t think it would have altered the result as Gale would probably have put the drop goal over anyway.
Re: Wakefield trinity
Maybe but they got a few themselves as well. The play that lead to their last penalty kick should have been Leeds ball and the Leeds defender charging down Wakeys drop goal was obstructed.heritage1926 wrote: ↑15 May 2021, 08:27Had a look at the Hurrell/Arundel incident and nothing in to be fair. However, I thought Wakey were shafted throughout the game, thought Leeds got away with a lot. Usually I enjoy seeing Wakey in demise, but not when the refereeing is so bad.derbystiger wrote: ↑14 May 2021, 23:01Tripped was my thoughts too. Pitt’s definitely unlucky, a 50/50 call that Hicks really should have just let that go and told Leeds to play the ball. Don’t think it would have altered the result as Gale would probably have put the drop goal over anyway.
-
old cas lass Verified
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 23222
- Joined: 26 Dec 2007, 14:29
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Mark Wilson twitter account.
I understand that @WTrinityRL have been told by Steve Ganson that the decision to award the penalty for a ball strip in Golden Point Extra Time vs Leeds Rhinos was an “incorrect decision.” Looked harsh at the time. Not sure that will make anyone at Wakey feel better mind
That’s gonna be hard to take.
Least ganson as come out and admitted it.
I understand that @WTrinityRL have been told by Steve Ganson that the decision to award the penalty for a ball strip in Golden Point Extra Time vs Leeds Rhinos was an “incorrect decision.” Looked harsh at the time. Not sure that will make anyone at Wakey feel better mind
That’s gonna be hard to take.
Least ganson as come out and admitted it.
Re: Wakefield trinity
all the ref had to do was make him play the ball.
-
lurcher Verified
- Super League Player
- Posts: 10676
- Joined: 19 Aug 2010, 23:25
- Location: bridlington
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
he did but thinking about it they were in great position for the 1 pointer any way.
jo brand is eddie warings love child
-
Verified
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 15893
- Joined: 31 Jan 2009, 03:55
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Should have been play on, Wakey ball. Ball carrying arm never touches the ground, therefore never held. All done in one movement top while momentum never stops.
Farce of a decision that cost Wakey a good win and moved Chester potentially closer to the sack.
Farce of a decision that cost Wakey a good win and moved Chester potentially closer to the sack.
In the spirit of the final Blackadder episode - Goooodbyeee!
- mart0042
- Championship Player
- Posts: 6355
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 15:06
- Location: behind the table in the lab deep under Racoon City.....
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
I'm not sure on this new rule. My main picking point is at what point is the ball classed a taken?
Macca had the ball in the leigh match and held it away from his chest to look for a pass, at that point contact came in and a leigh player clamped the ball. The leigh player took the ball and player to the ground and the sky commentators call it a strip and legal. But it's not given and macca plays the ball.
Macca nevet lost the ball or contact with it. So it seems a case of who has it closer to their chest.
Surely they're has to be a point at which the player with the ball doesn't have contact with it for it to be classed as stolen? Even one hand still attached is in contact with it?
Can someone explain the rules as it doesn't seem right.
Macca had the ball in the leigh match and held it away from his chest to look for a pass, at that point contact came in and a leigh player clamped the ball. The leigh player took the ball and player to the ground and the sky commentators call it a strip and legal. But it's not given and macca plays the ball.
Macca nevet lost the ball or contact with it. So it seems a case of who has it closer to their chest.
Surely they're has to be a point at which the player with the ball doesn't have contact with it for it to be classed as stolen? Even one hand still attached is in contact with it?
Can someone explain the rules as it doesn't seem right.
- flood light tiger
- Academy Player
- Posts: 875
- Joined: 25 Apr 2011, 16:36
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Sorry nobody knows what the rules are even the RFL who make them don’t know
- mart0042
- Championship Player
- Posts: 6355
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 15:06
- Location: behind the table in the lab deep under Racoon City.....
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
I guess your right.flood light tiger wrote: ↑20 May 2021, 14:01 Sorry nobody knows what the rules are even the RFL who make them don’t know
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 1723
- Joined: 05 Jan 2021, 17:59
- Contact:
Re: Wakefield trinity
Haven't they now said it was the wrong decision?mart0042 wrote: ↑21 May 2021, 10:01I guess your right.flood light tiger wrote: ↑20 May 2021, 14:01 Sorry nobody knows what the rules are even the RFL who make them don’t know
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Semrush [Bot] and 9 guests