Mrs Barista wrote:Paea back and maybe Westy for the cup game if I heard Radford right (would be amazed if Westerman were fit and wouldn't rush him back). No injuries picked up today either.
Spoke to Joe the other day, he told me Saints game. Hopefully he won't play next week as it means he will have been rushed back.
Fields of Fire wrote:Just watched it what a right farse that was to stop the game for a player down in back play who was no were near the play it would have been a massive injustice to not win from that position.
He stopped it because Wattsy was floored in the line, not the Wire player in back play. From where I was stood I thought he'd given a penalty when he pointed back.
Joined: Aug 18 2013 Posts: 710 Location: Kingswood the greatest place to live in Hull
*1865* wrote:He stopped it because Wattsy was floored in the line, not the Wire player in back play. From where I was stood I thought he'd given a penalty when he pointed back.
Watts was stood up after the play the ball he went down on his knees after Silverwood had stopped play to go over to the Warrington player on the half way line the commentators thought he'd given a penalty as well.
Fields of Fire wrote:Watts was stood up after the play the ball he went down on his knees after Silverwood had stopped play to go over to the Warrington player on the half way line the commentators thought he'd given a penalty as well.
Did he? Thanks for that, hadn't realised. Stupid to stop the game then and could even be construed as deliberate? Thankfully it never cost us.
Joined: Aug 18 2013 Posts: 710 Location: Kingswood the greatest place to live in Hull
*1865* wrote:Did he? Thanks for that, hadn't realised. Stupid to stop the game then and could even be construed as deliberate? Thankfully it never cost us.
Yeah thankfully it never cost us the clip on fcs facebook page shows the last few seconds of play I'm sure we'd have kicked up a stink if it had silverwood had his arm out like he'd given a penalty.
Joined: Aug 01 2005 Posts: 5917 Location: Definately not in the Cuddle Crew
*1865* wrote::lol:
So what i said was wrong then?
I think people are understating the Ellis factor. He came back today and we battled back to a win, without him its just the same old dross - maybe Ellis is a leader ahead of Radford like Kearney was a leader ahead of Kear?
I think people are understating the Ellis factor. He came back today and we battled back to a win, without him its just the same old dross - maybe Ellis is a leader ahead of Radford like Kearney was a leader ahead of Kear?
Joined: Jul 15 2005 Posts: 29816 Location: West Yorkshire
Sebasteeno wrote:So what i said was wrong then?
I think people are understating the Ellis factor. He came back today and we battled back to a win, without him its just the same old dross - maybe Ellis is a leader ahead of Radford like Kearney was a leader ahead of Kear?
What's the correlation coefficient this year of Ellis playing and us winning? I don't think it will be that high since he's just returned and we're five from six. Try another hypothesis.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
' width=15> 
