Bottom line is we didnt deliver tonight . Tactics need refreshing unfortunately . You just have to keep moving

We played how we were at the start of the season. Great season after that poor start, but we were pretty awful today. Unlucky in part, Lachlan's gift to them in the first half (he should probably have batted it dead for a drop-out), Adam getting the ball dislodged (fairly, imo), and hitting the post with the penalty, but with a pretty much full squad available, there's no way we should have lost today. Well done to York for coming up with a game-plan to disrupt us, but bad on us for not being able to react to that.

Grix utterly outflanked by Ford. Will he learn from it? I doubt it. Unlucky though York were Sensational.

Without watching it back to get a better viewing, live you could see it coming, York were better than I expected running it in hard and made big meters on their exit sets with a Harris looking more of a threat the longer the game went on and fast line speed closed down our attack.
We made the usual amount of mistakes that gifted them a couple of scores and missed a straight forward kick when they didn’t.
Well done York deserved it on the night.

Totally agree. York’s line speed was faster and more aggressive than ours. We stood still and let them run at us and that sort of defence doesn’t work.

Too many minds on next week. Along with thoughts of the 2 decent wins in the league, Leighs recent 100 point mullering and last weeks close scoreline v Fev to take into the semis.
Harris in that second half probably shocked players and fans alike. He showed play-off class and it spooked the Fax team into their shell.

Thats play off rugby and the best team won. I think we looked tired and lathargic and that was my biggest worry about playing a full team last week against Fev and I think that was a mistake and we paid the price for it tonight.

[quote="The Phantom Horseman"]Respectfully, I don't think you know the rules, do you? Craven is the marker. He doesn't have to be behind the line. If the play the ball is 12 inches from the line, as it was, and his foot is six inches from the line, he's onside. In any case, his left foot was behind the line (and his right foot in front of it) and my understanding is that would be classed as being behind the line even if he weren't the marker.

Well that’s interesting and incorrect.
I only know and understand the rules from what I experienced playing, watching and reading which includes the following.

Quotes: “If the attacking team are less than 10m from the try line, then the referee will tell the defending team to get behind the try line.”
"Behind when applied to a player means, unless otherwise stated, that both feet are behind the position in question. Similarly 'in front of' means nearer to one's opponent's goal line."
(Which considering the field position and proximity to the try line must include the marker otherwise he would be stood in the play the ball.)
And.
“A defending player is offside if they are less than 10 metres away from the play-the-ball (or, if the play-the-ball is inside his 10-metre line, closer to it than the try-line is.”
(Which he was closer to the ptb with his foot being beyond the try line.)

What are you basing your understanding on to say (“Craven is the marker. He doesn't have to be behind the line. If the play the ball is 12 inches from the line, as it was, and his foot is six inches from the line, he's onside. In any case, his left foot was behind the line (and his right foot in front of it) and my understanding is that would be classed as being behind the line even if he weren't the marker”) because it seems to contradict the above quoted rules.

Is it a something you know for sure or just your general interpretation?
I only ask because, respectfully, I don’t think you know the rules do you?

Oh dear.

No really much to add to what has been said already. Some players had terrible games; Barber, Worthington, and Mcomb. We really are short on line busting centres. Arundel really hasn't set the world alight, a couple of 5-metre walkins doesn't disguise his lack of impact. Worthington is on his way but he really isn't the centre of his Featherstone days. Mccomb for all is endeavour is going to be limited by his lack of size. But not discounting some obscene errors tonight, Tangata's and Walmsley's were the difference. I actually felt we lacked leadership tonight and was concerning that we couldn't stop the flow in the second half. All in all, despite the loss, we improved from last season and had evidently moved to a new level. Just fell one game short of last year. We closed the gap on Fev and with some shrewd investment, hoping we can attract players to come play under Grix as I am confident that he can attract even better players.

Players on the move; Worthington, Garside, Barber, Morris, Larroyer? Knowles?