: Sun May 10, 2009 11:21 pm  

andysilsden wrote:

I think you deserve one.

remember the tri-nations final a couple of years ago. That went to golden point extra time, but it ended up been a try that won it deep inside the 1st period, which is fair enough. But a dropgoal just over 1 minute into extra time is a poor way to decide the game, especially when it was anounced it would be 10mins eachway. Should be golden try, not golden point.

Well they say everything that glistens isn`t gold and it`s certainly true in this case the RFL had reps there but it was shambolic at the end.Me thinks the "Golden Point" could just be plated and appears to be peeling off by the looks of things.I can just imagine it in a scene from an Abbot and Costello movie.
"yes Nigel that`s another fine mess you`ve got us in".

: Sun May 10, 2009 11:56 pm  

johnny freeman fan club wrote:

Well they say everything that glistens isn`t gold and it`s certainly true in this case the RFL had reps there but it was shambolic at the end.Me thinks the "Golden Point" could just be plated and appears to be peeling off by the looks of things.I can just imagine it in a scene from an Abbot and Costello movie.
"yes Nigel that`s another fine mess you`ve got us in".

Wouldn't that be Laurel and Hardy? And FAR more apt!

: Mon May 11, 2009 12:01 am  

Can't everyone stop moaning ffs? It's taking the gloss off a great performance by the team.

Not a good way to lose I agree, but the way one team was always going to lose according to the rules, which, at the end of the day, the players, coaches and officials knew, and were the same for every club in every game of the round.

The single problem was that the PA man was badly briefed and didn't make the situation clear to the crowd at the outset. That's Cas's fault, no-one else's.

The (SL) coaches don't want replays - they think they already play too many games - and they're the people with the sway. They're the ones who've brought about this rule.

"In all honesty I'd be saying the same if we'd won".

My ar5e.

: Mon May 11, 2009 12:06 am  

OB, are you sure that the players knew that it was the golden point regardless of what was announced? If they were, then that'll do me.

Ok, it robbed me of another 20 minutes of great RL. but I certainly got the impression that nobody knew until the announcement.

: Mon May 11, 2009 12:38 am  

Officeboy wrote:

Can't everyone stop moaning ffs? It's taking the gloss off a great performance by the team.

Got to agree with OB on this one. When I woke up and saw the score I was really pleased that we had shown that we can compete at that level and was proud of the team. To my mind this was just a distraction from the priority which if getting to the GF.

Lets say that they had have gone for the 10 mins extra time each way. What do you think the final score would have been then? As much as we had competed over the 80, fitness levels and being full time would have really shown in the extra 20. I'm sure nobody would have been happy with a 50-34 scoreline and all the bleating would have been about 'not being a true reflection of the game.'

Just be proud of what the team did and lets move on. Bigger fish to fry and all that.

: Mon May 11, 2009 7:18 am  

Officeboy wrote:

Can't everyone stop moaning ffs? It's taking the gloss off a great performance by the team.

Not a good way to lose I agree, but the way one team was always going to lose according to the rules, which, at the end of the day, the players, coaches and officials knew, and were the same for every club in every game of the round.

The single problem was that the PA man was badly briefed and didn't make the situation clear to the crowd at the outset. That's Cas's fault, no-one else's.

The (SL) coaches don't want replays - they think they already play too many games - and they're the people with the sway. They're the ones who've brought about this rule.

"In all honesty I'd be saying the same if we'd won".

My ar5e.

So according to you we just accept this total abortion of a rule then cos our lads played so well????
Yer I have said on other threads how well the lads played this is about a stupid rule okay?
We are not all like some people who do not have have not an honest bone in their body, some of us have some integrity and I DO MEAN I would be saying the same if we had won.

: Mon May 11, 2009 7:22 am  

Fax Missionary wrote:

Got to agree with OB on this one. When I woke up and saw the score I was really pleased that we had shown that we can compete at that level and was proud of the team. To my mind this was just a distraction from the priority which if getting to the GF.

Lets say that they had have gone for the 10 mins extra time each way. What do you think the final score would have been then? As much as we had competed over the 80, fitness levels and being full time would have really shown in the extra 20. I'm sure nobody would have been happy with a 50-34 scoreline and all the bleating would have been about 'not being a true reflection of the game.'

Just be proud of what the team did and lets move on. Bigger fish to fry and all that.

Look like I have put in reply to OB we are all well happy how our lads played and yes I agree we are probably better off out of the Cup so we can focus on the NRC and Championship BUT we can discuss a rule that I think is an ass and hope the RFL review it so no other players (and fans) lose the way we did.

: Mon May 11, 2009 8:19 am  

Fax Missionary wrote:

Got to agree with OB on this one. When I woke up and saw the score I was really pleased that we had shown that we can compete at that level and was proud of the team. To my mind this was just a distraction from the priority which if getting to the GF.

Lets say that they had have gone for the 10 mins extra time each way. What do you think the final score would have been then? As much as we had competed over the 80, fitness levels and being full time would have really shown in the extra 20. I'm sure nobody would have been happy with a 50-34 scoreline and all the bleating would have been about 'not being a true reflection of the game.'

Just be proud of what the team did and lets move on. Bigger fish to fry and all that.

That dos'nt wash, I personally talked to at least 4 of the players straight after the game. The only thing they were aware of was two 10 minute periods, then the GP. Plus there was the fact as we were playing so well that it could have been us who ended up with 50 points.

: Mon May 11, 2009 8:42 am  

Fax Missionary wrote:

Got to agree with OB on this one. When I woke up and saw the score I was really pleased that we had shown that we can compete at that level and was proud of the team. To my mind this was just a distraction from the priority which if getting to the GF.

Lets say that they had have gone for the 10 mins extra time each way. What do you think the final score would have been then? As much as we had competed over the 80, fitness levels and being full time would have really shown in the extra 20. I'm sure nobody would have been happy with a 50-34 scoreline and all the bleating would have been about 'not being a true reflection of the game.'

Just be proud of what the team did and lets move on. Bigger fish to fry and all that.

Well I don`t think for one minute anybody is not pleased with our lads ,it is well documented from all of us how proud we all were of them .But I do beg to differ about our fitness levels as opposed to thiers.We were at Castlefords hospitality on Saturday and in the room after the match there were Castleford people and an ex -player of ours who were saying our fitness was better than Cass` at the end .
Also this is a public debate forum and whichever side had lost it was not a fair way to end a match like that .If people are not allowed to debate a rule and voice concerns if they think it is wrong how do you ever get it changed or at least try to.
I will also say the announcer was probably wrongley briefed but as the RFL official was on the pitch when it ended he should have made sure everyone on and off the pitch was fully aware of the situation.

: Mon May 11, 2009 8:56 am  

johnny freeman fan club wrote:

I will also say the announcer was probably wrongley briefed but as the RFL official was on the pitch when it ended he should have made sure everyone on and off the pitch was fully aware of the situation.

Did the person briefing the officials even know the rules? Did he brief them correctly? Why were the rules on the RFL website changed on Sunday when we played on Saturday?