As stated earlier in this thread, if tries had not been s ored off the back of dubious decisions, there would be no debate.

The taking out of Waterhouse which lead to a Hull Try was awarded as Waterhouse was offside when the ball was played. Correct decision.

Have you seen a better replay than the one the video ref showed then? Because they did not show the PTB, they showed when the dummy-half passed the ball. Where Trent was when the ball touched the foot of the man playing the ball is still a mystery to me as it wasn't shown.

No complaints other than that though. I thought Hull looked fitter, leaner, more athletic, and had a better kicking game than we did. Last twenty I thought we looked tired out (unfit).

Best team won simple as that their kicking game second half was excellent may be the reason we tired being constantly turned around?

Regarding fans with the likes of Billy the dot king kno.b Batten on your board are FC fans universally loved?

We all have our 'over enthusiastic' fans I'm afraid.

I personally thought Waterhouse would have been offside but I agree there wasn't a definitive camera angle, however Lineham's disallowed try should have stood IMO

Fair enough, we have our fair share nothing more nothing less but agree that we do seem to rattle opposition fans beyond natural derby type rivalries? We seem to be on most teams 'hate' lists and not just as a result of our recent successes.

Not a bleat from me BTW just an observation it doesn't really bother me in fact it might even be a source of pride to some an RL case of 'No one likes us, we don't care'?

Well played last night

Slow the video down and you can tell Waterhouse was well on his way before the ball was played. Correct decision by the video ref, That imo balanced it out anyway because he disallowed Hull a perfectly good try early on.

surely waterhouse was offside and wire have scored tries from dubious forward passes,also we were kicking deep after tackle 4 but apart from that you avoided sounding bitter.

Well played to Hull they looked more lively and more imaginative than we did. Hull are a good side and have taken over the the 'Heroic Underachievers' mantel. They will be there or there about at the end of the season as they are a good side.

We looked a bit tired in the second half but that must have been partly due to the superb kicking game Hull employed. Holdsworth was outstanding. Good to see Ellis back on the paddock, he will be become a rock for them as he gets more games under his belt.

Thought Big Riley ran with more purpose and will hopefully continue to improve.

What was important for me is it proved we can compete.

A lot of Wire fans assumed it was an easy 16+ victory, they posted on this very forum. (different thread)

Most FC fans expected a close game, that might have produced a result if we played our A game.

I suppose the difference in expectation is because of recent history, but perhaps we might start getting a little more respect, of course we need to produce that on a regular basis.

You've said this about three times, now. What's a 'chicken chocker', Einstein?

Really? So when he reckoned he was a cat chocker, sorry, choker, he was jocking, er joking, then? Good to hear it.

Listen i know the only things in Hull are rugby, football and crack and football has finished doesn't mean you have to exhaust the other two, 1905 and SC are two different people, and SC is never anything but sarcastic on here, almost irritatingly so, a kind of 'hello meet my representative, the real me thinks your all tiresome'

Ah, yes. You think we've 'peaked'. Could you embellish this opinion a little with some considerations and arguments as to why?

My own opinion, even as an ever-cautious Hull fan, is that we are steadily building momentum from a disasterously humiliating Hull KR Good Friday defeat. Our injured players are returning, our much-jigged half back combination is now clicking and just starting to pay dividends, our structures and game plans are gelling, and we are beginning to demonstrate our potential. I've formed this opinion from observing all our games this season. Have you? Will be a few 'banana skins', though, possibly against Rovers next week, for example.

Thoughts?

Oh dear.

Ah. So, referring to my question above, 'SC' was only being sarcastic when he mentioned he'd tortured and killed at least one cat on the Sin Bin a few weeks ago? As I said, good to hear. Good job he's got you to speak for him.

SC's posts are nearly always TIC, sarcastic, or intended to provoke. His contribution to this thread is entirely in character and TBH quite obviously not intended to be taken seriously.

Just two points about the 'controversial' tries...

Waterhouse is quite clearly offside when the ball is played. At least two camera angles show it, granted I've seen the footage a number of times.

The 'forward pass' try does indeed contain one forward pass - from Houghton at the ruck. The other passes are fine although, again, first time of viewing they look marginal. Forward passes from the ruck happen regularly and are nearly always missed for some reason.

I did think you should have had a penalty near the end when Briscoe had his legs wrapped around the leg of your guy trying to play the ball. Otherwise Silverwood was his normal self.

Not piqued by anything he's said on this thread. I [iwas[/i concerned by something he said on the Sin Bin a few weeks ago though, which - even if he was being sarcastic - was, for me, unsavoury. Hence my response to "HY" (is that the accepted abbreviation-of-name format on here?) after he asserted that "SC" posts universally in sarcastic mode as if everything and everyone was tiresome (a bit like a cat, then) asking if that was the case on that occasion.

If, as you say, he also intends to provoke, that may have been his intention as I was provoked.

Yes, there was a replay which showed the defensive line as the ball was played, TW set off too early.

I disagree. I thought it was a legal pass.

Houghton passes on one of the pitch markings and the receiver takes it on the same line. Considering Houghton was stationary passing from dummy half, can that mean that the line can be used as a good indicator?

Good game i thought.... enjoyed watching the physical battle... Our inability to complete sets cost us, especially on the last tackle in the first half. On another day we would have scored 20+ in the first half.. Credit to Hull for their excellent defense though..

Negatives for me - I don't know what has happened to Atkins this season. He looks rubbish. M. Monaghan looks a shadow of the player he once was. We are hugely reliant on Higham now in the hooking role. I expect this to be remedied next season with the purchase of a new hooker... Also Westwood is still struggling to get back to his best. He showed glimpses of the last seasons player, but he is no longer dominating games like he used to. Coopers ball retention is still poor.

Positives - Riley looked like he could have a decent future (the big one, not the turnstyle). Ratchford looked excellent, as did Myler. Hill ran hard and make great yards... the younger lads stood up to be counted last night, which was pleasing to see.

IMO, you failed to complete sets near to our line due to our defensive pressure. Against a weaker defence you'd have scored 20+ points in the 1st half. We were obviously feeling confident in our defence and were happy to kick early in the tackle count in the latter stages of the game.

Hull's ball control in the 1st half was poor also and we didn't complete sets in your 20 on 4 or 5 occasions but we improved our ball control significantly in the 2nd half which is what won us the game in the end.

For those looking for excuses, compare the 2 sides last night and consider how many of our players you'd currently swap for their opposite number in your side. Even with P&B coloured specs I'd expect there would be a few and I think at full strength there isn't that much between the sides. We do look fitter and faster though

Nothing to do with silverdud the loss , very tight close game and Hull wanted it that little bit more , there tactics was spot on in the 2nd half , keeping us as far away as possible from there 20 with a great kicking game and doggish defence , not worried in the slightest still have quality players to come back in the team

We've had a few years out of the mix due to frankly incredibly bad luck in the injury department, poor running of the club, poor coaching and no stable half back pairing.

In this same period of time Warrington came of age and signfiicantly improved into the deserved position you are now as one of the top Super League sides.

We now have a good coach with Gentle,, stable half back pairings with Richard Horne, Houldsworth, Hermeria and Houghton, with renewed competition from like like of Miller coming in and a well run club under Pearson, plus a great experienced captain in Gareth Ellis.

I can understand your perception. But I have a confidence that I haven't experienced as a Hull FC since about 2006, so we shall see.