: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:02 am  

Sheldon wrote:

how did people think the bench worked?

thackray
manu
washbrook
houghton

it doesn't scream of a good balance to me.

Tbf against them it was a good idea to go in with 4 forwards........would have Washbrook in at 13 and hall on the bench and possibly another prop in place of Houghton,if he isnt needed.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:49 am  

the problem is with berro, thorman & horne dictating play, washy looked a bit lost when he was on, this needs to be addressed by agar & sharp in what systems we play. one prop on the bench? well we have the luxury in having 2 props in dowes & cusack who get better and more effective as the game goes on and the more time they stay out there so in some games i think we can getaway with one prop benching.

as for the titbrain fc fan who was fightin, what was all that about? knockin back sambucas (apparently) for the sake of it before a rugby game is just well, a waste of bloody good sambuca to me. felt sorry for the cc fan who got the brunt cos he had no where to turn until his mate got him away. the fc was rightly hoyed out the ground by the stewards.

otherwise a good followin from hull, difficult to put a figure on it but around a quarter of the crowd i would say. would look forward to a summer game there next year and have a few days down in the valleys, akki dak!

[Kosh]

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:01 am  

Sheldon wrote:

how did people think the bench worked?

thackray
manu
washbrook
houghton

it doesn't scream of a good balance to me.

Not well IMO.

Thacks and Manu offered very little when they came on. Disappointed with both TBH.

Washy was OK given that his first spell was at SO as we re-jigged when Skinny went off. Broke a few tackles and was generally solid in defence.

Houghton was OK for his first run out. Some good scoots from DH and solid defence. Didn't command the game like Berro was doing, but that's hardly a surprise.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:22 am  

Kosh wrote:

Not well IMO.

Thacks and Manu offered very little when they came on. Disappointed with both TBH.

Washy was OK given that his first spell was at SO as we re-jigged when Skinny went off. Broke a few tackles and was generally solid in defence.

Houghton was OK for his first run out. Some good scoots from DH and solid defence. Didn't command the game like Berro was doing, but that's hardly a surprise.

I didn't go so can't comment on last night's match other than other than what other people have posted, however my overall impression after the wigan game was that things were no different from last year other than we had a better goal line defence, our kicking game was marginally better (other than when dykes was fit and his kicking game was head and shoulders above Horne's and Thorman's) and we seemed fitter. Other than that we had the same deficiencies - opposition making too many easy yards upfied, forwards not big enough to make much of an impact, slow PTB from most of the team, no direction in attack, poor last tackle options, no dummy runners, and a whole host of other issues.

2 wins is a good start but to be fair we've played a wigan team who have lost 2 home games against sides likely to be in the bottom 4 and struggled to finish off the side who everyone expects to be 14th at the end of the season. Still a long way to go to convince me that the squad is playing to it's undoubted potential and I fear teh worst for Friday having seen the cats steam roller warrington last night

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:30 am  

Kosh wrote:

That was true for large parts of the game, unfortunately. Especially disappointing was our almost total inability to prevent the offload and letting in two soft tries on our left flank.

I thought that Tickle, Dowes, R Horne and Berro were our best players. A few others need to up their games, including Thacks and Manu.

dont be too dissapointed about hulls inability to stop the offload, i have seen celtic twice now and they seem to throw the ball about like the harlem globetrotters at real speed. they celtic are going to have a 20min spell in every game were they will do this to most sides. Thats why the team who plays consistantly for 80mins usually wins

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:39 am  

Jake the Peg wrote:

I didn't go so can't comment on last night's match other than other than what other people have posted, however my overall impression after the wigan game was that things were no different from last year other than we had a better goal line defence, our kicking game was marginally better (other than when dykes was fit and his kicking game was head and shoulders above Horne's and Thorman's) and we seemed fitter. Other than that we had the same deficiencies - opposition making too many easy yards upfied, forwards not big enough to make much of an impact, slow PTB from most of the team, no direction in attack, poor last tackle options, no dummy runners, and a whole host of other issues.

2 wins is a good start but to be fair we've played a wigan team who have lost 2 home games against sides likely to be in the bottom 4 and struggled to finish off the side who everyone expects to be 14th at the end of the season. Still a long way to go to convince me that the squad is playing to it's undoubted potential and I fear teh worst for Friday having seen the cats steam roller warrington last night

incredible 2 out of 2 and you come out with sh!te like that,our forwards battered wigan down the middle in second half,you cant knock our forwards at minute radford is going well/cusack/dowes making plenty yards also. wigan had a lot of players missing due to knocks picked up in hull game, we really hurt them.

[Kosh]

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:46 am  

gafar wrote:

dont be too dissapointed about hulls inability to stop the offload, i have seen celtic twice now and they seem to throw the ball about like the harlem globetrotters at real speed. they celtic are going to have a 20min spell in every game were they will do this to most sides. Thats why the team who plays consistantly for 80mins usually wins

The point is that we should have known that and yet it still seemed to take us by surprise. We stood off them and let them play the game to their strengths rather than close them down early.

For large parts of the game we looked exactly like last year's team.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:51 am  

Kosh wrote:

The point is that we should have known that and yet it still seemed to take us by surprise. We stood off them and let them play the game to their strengths rather than close them down early.

For large parts of the game we looked exactly like last year's team.

fair enough i wasn,t there. respect what your saying.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:16 am  

Kosh wrote:

Not well IMO.

Thacks and Manu offered very little when they came on. Disappointed with both TBH.

Washy was OK given that his first spell was at SO as we re-jigged when Skinny went off. Broke a few tackles and was generally solid in defence.

Houghton was OK for his first run out. Some good scoots from DH and solid defence. Didn't command the game like Berro was doing, but that's hardly a surprise.

Agree with all that. Manu made a couple of good runs but his fitness levels don't seem to be up with the others. Thackray made little impact. Washy looks to have bulked up maybe a bit too much. Houghton did look a bit rusty but needs some gametime.

Funny how things pan out - Dowes, Tickle, Cusack and Byrne the best players in the first 2 games. All the players that were labelled average at best last year.

On another point, I have to say the away strip hasn't grown on me at all and looks awful on the players. Most girly kit ever.

: Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:25 am  

gafar wrote:

fair enough i wasn,t there. respect what your saying.

Wait until it's been on The Super League show and this lot will be full of 'it'.

Primarily it is (right now) the same team, barring; Thorman= for me our main addition to the team, Calderwood=a winger, a position Hull Fc tend not to utilise to the maximum.

For me the main benefit we'll see this season is having a settled team,(hopefully) rather than an outstanding one.