Garbutt was very good. Mullally was awful, and can't believe the stick Achurch is getting comparison. Although one good thing of Mullally he gets down and up quickly for a play the ball.

As usual on here it either has to be from one extreme to the other.

Mullally was neither immense nor awful. He had an ok game, some good stuff and some stuff to work on. Coming into the season around 4th/5th prop he's doing a decent job and signs he can improve further with more games and experience. At 24 he's still quite young in prop terms and only has roughly around the same amount of SL games as Sutcliffe under his belt.

i agree he was decent and did as well as you would expect for a player we bought as a project really.

On Achurch, he gets stick because he is paid big money and still fails to deliver big performances.He actually wasn't terrible to be fair last night but the one off load aside, was no more than average again.

That is because it is s message board, of opinions, and your opinion is no more right than anyone else's, no matter how much you want to think it is.

On the season you are correct, but the posts were about last night, about last night only, so why does a point about the season come in to it.

Didn't say it was more right did I? Or shall I ask you to quote me saying that as you love asking that? I gave my opinion that people go to extremes when judging players performances.....now untwist your knickers Mr Sensitive because as we know on here when it comes to someone thinking his opinion is more right or near as dammit a fact then you take the biscuit.



It's a message board, I didn't realise that after commenting on his performance last night that I couldn't extend my view on how he's gone on so far in the season. Or do I need your permission to do that?

Oops! Here we go again. More 'handbags'

At least we're discussing rugby on a rugby forum, and not talking about our building of children toys AirFix models.

You could have fooled me ....



Hornby will be thinking "if only" ..... those halcyon, profitable days are long gone.

Wouldn't take much, just a sensible comment of rugby usually does the trick. Like you being flabbergasted at the thought of signing a proven Kiwi international in Leuluai but continually asking for Golding to play HB even though you've never see him play there.

Are you going to play with your train set, scalextrics or action man figures tonight?

Leuluai would be a desperation signing ...Leeds should be looking to do much better. Golding is worth a shot at HB, IMO...that's all. Just an opinion.

I don't have a train set, scalextric or action man...but if you fancy joining me for a game of crossfire I could make a place for you....if you promise to leave your handbag at home

I thought Mullally was a more effective sub than Singleton and he made more tackles than either Singleton or Garbutt. Yes he is a bit raw but that is to be expected. He could well turn out to be a better bet than Singleton given the Sam chance.

Is that the chance to play with your brothers in the NRL?

The thing I like about Mullally is that he consistently makes metres after contact, he's hard to bring down and he almost always finds his front when he goes down. Good signs IMO. He's not as good defensively but I'm sure he'll get better.

Agree with this.Thought it was Peacock esq the way he seemed to make that couple of extra metres in determined fashion after contact, especially in those conditions.Don't understand the criticism of Golding though;thought he brought the ball back well (don't think he was vigorous in contact but maybe he was a little tentative regarding spilling the ball in in those wet conditions).

thought referee joe cobb had an excellent game 2 points difference and no one mentioned the ref (usually in close games fans moan about refs giving or not giving penalties to their side)

Yep. And it certainly wasn't the conditions for a player with the attributes of Golding. He did nothing wrong though, which is all that matters.

I agree. It wasn't an easy one either. The two big decisions which were the head shots for both sides that should have both got 10 minutes imo, he let go as just penalties but at least it was consistent.

Not from where I was stood, there was one point where Hardaker looses the ball, hull players had hands on but no clear rip and it was given as a knock on, 4 plays later a Hull player looses the ball when we had hands on but no rip and he gave a penalty.

Its those inconsistencies that frustrate fans and players, Burrow even said to him at one point that all we wanted was a fair crack

The losing ball in contact are not easy to get right and you will get some for you and some against.That goes for all refs.

I thought overall he did a decent job for a ref you don't see much of in the big games. Put it this way, i would have him every game of the week over James Child.

Thought he had one genuinely big decision to make on the Watts challenge, and got it wrong despite having plenty of time to take advice and weigh up his options.

Looked to me like the pressure of being in the middle of a big TV game made his backside fall out a bit.

I thought the Watts challenge was a sin bin myself Andy. And he had already let one similar go by one of the Leeds players(i forget who) earlier in the game so i can see why he didn't take action.

He wasn't perfect by any means, but he didn't spoil the game either like other more esteemed SL refs do on a regular basis.

Probably should've given Watts a card but maybe a tad reluctant to ruin a contest by taking a guy off/a bit of leeway given because the guy on the receiving end was Burrow and he'll always cop a few high ones. Overall I thought he did well, one or two decisions could've gone the other way but that'll always happen in games. Most importantly he didn't look like he wanted to be the centre of attention unlike some other certain referees.

As for Ash Golding, he did well. He obviously isn't going to give you the strong forward-esque carries that Briscoe and Hall can but he did a job including a key escape from in goal. His position now and in the future clearly isn't going to be as a winger, but in today's game with so many injuries about then if he can do a job there when needed like on Friday then it's very useful whilst waiting for games in a preferred position.

The Watts one should have been a yellow card as it was as much as a proffesional foul than anything else with the way it allowed his team mates to get back into the defensive line

Re-Ref He bottled the Watts one imo Yellow Card minimum as for our "high" shot the player is going to ground when contact is made & it wasn't as blatant a stiff swinging arm either.
The "ball steal" calls have been covered but imo the VR has plenty of time to intevene & correct those calls.

i wouldn't say you are wrong in what you say because he was falling and it wasn't intentional imo and always looks worse in slow mo, but don't forget moon saw red against Saints for similar last season.