Not if you don't want to Shaggoth. You can believe what you want, free country and all that. History, so they say, is written by the winners anyway, so maybe we should ask for a St Helens opinion and just accept that? Personally, I find that shortly after the heat of battle is far from the best time to reflect on what went on in any match, and the bigger the game the more true I find it.

It's strange that you use 'revisionist' in a pejorative sense, surely if we never reflect on what we saw (or occasionally what we thought we saw) and review our thoughts and opinions accordingly we're just accepting our 'instant' views as the sole truth. Again, speaking personally, I can rarely be objective when the game is on; I want to win too much and get far too involved (I probably said ffs Graham, why can't you catch the *^%*ing thing, at the cup final) but it is only when looking dispassionately, at a later time, that the truth slaps you in the face.

Can I suggest you have another, maybe more objective, look at the match? I know it isn't very good viewing for a Bull's fan but it just might lay a ghost!!

I wonder if he gets the same sort of unfair blame at the hospital too. Not sure what his job is though. Maybe he's the cleaner and gets blamed if a patient's heart operation goes wrong or something.

Will have to ask my source what his job is. If it's heart surgeon, then fair enough

Hudson Smith.

Watch his 2 attempted tackles in the "wide to west try"

Shocking.

I did wonder if Gleds might have known, but there again, big trust, hundreds of employees, different shifts, different sites, I guess there's no real reason he would.

Now there's a name that no amount of revisionism can rehabilitate for Salford fans. Good old Homesick Hudson....