Well try his last post, as he's still repeating it.

The last one skirts much closer, yes. But it still reads to me as players letting little niggles bother them that in other circumstances they might play on with, rather than an accusation of players inventing injuries to avoid playing. There's a difference between using a convenient but legitimate excuse to avoid doing something, and lying to create an excuse. It's Mrs B and yourself that have put that latter element onto it so far.

Attributing it to Radford is a bit of a stretch, though.

At least it won't be in a position where we're struggling.

Easily the dumbest shizzle I've ever read on these pages. Ever. New depths here. Wow.
Rugby league. One of the physical n demanding team sports. 5 day turn around. If you've picked up any in joint inflammation or deep tissue bruising you're always gonna be struggling.
So what you're saying is players will happily let their teammates n many of them close friends struggle n be embarrassed because they don't like losing or not keen on the coach.
Players would have a harder time wanting to play for the fans than any other issues when this is the mindset of some and when their character as a person is being questioned.
Not happy about our position myself but you just come across as a complete tool with these comments.

So you're saying they're making injuries up because they don't want to play?

And this post makes little sense or even reads right before you start criticising others.

Nope. It's saying that players out injured [imight[/i be pushing harder to be declared fit if we were doing better.

Come on Mrs B you know that's not what he's implying.
Please don't let your perceived distaste of seb cloud the discussion.
As established by Carl spackler seb is merely pointing out hypothetically of course that due to our poor form or dislike for the coach players may be less likely to play on through the pain barrier and would rather wait until say the are100% fit instead of 80 to 90.

It amounts to the same thing. Players able to take the field but choosing to take the easy option. A disappointing accusation from a supporter IMO.

What I was saying was its been insinuated that players are due to their poor character as men are willing to let their teammates/friends cop the flack/struggle because they don't like to lose or play for the coach.

No the players and current coach are pillars of virtue arnt they as can be seen when they played in the play off game against Hudds in 2013

Makes me sad to think this is what some of our fans are now.
I know some sl players well n I lived with one for a while n I've seen the ridiculous lengths players go to to get out on the pitch when average folk would be off work for weeks n in physio for ages. Some of these lads setting themselves up for some uncomfortable later yrs in life for in some cases wages not much greater/less even than some of the posters on here. Of some of the tripe I read on here regular this actually angers me!

Was a lot happening then.
I knew bomber was off in may n that Gentle was going in the July. Lot of unrest behind the scenes.
The lads currently out have done enough in the games so far to be given the benefit that they are genuine. You name checked thompson for a start. Unfair imo

Only 6 out of the 17 in that Hudds game played v Leeds. Gentle was coach then, of course. Keep digging that poisonous hole though.

Not really. As you yourself said, one is a fairly libellous accusation of breach of contract, whereas the other is more a questioning of the players' depth of dedication to the cause. It appears to be a rather clumsy attempt to link it to the players not being behind Radford. The fairly stretched anti-Radford element does not make it the accusation you're suggesting, though.

I'll reiterate that I don't necessarily agree with him, but I think the interpretation you've applied is incorrect and a bit OTT, personally.



But allegedly it does go on. I bet we all remember how quickly model professional Richard Swain's bicep injury with it's curiously vague medium to long-term status cleared up after Kear's sacking.

21 incidents reviewed by the video panel this weekend, 20 not charged.

Iam surprised the moderators haven't come to your rescue,I didnt think posters were allowed to disagree with you even when your wrong,as you are in this instance.

The importance you place on my viewpoint is flattering. But the facts remain that a poster has said players currently out injured who'd heal up sharpish in other circumstances casting aspersions on the reality of Thompson and Green's injuries specifically. I find it disappointing that a supporter implies this sort of dishonesty or lack of commitment. Should take a leaf out of your fans' book resolutely defending Bailey against similar IMO.

Sometimes in life people , sportsmen , soldiers , workers , are inspired by a leader to go above and beyond the call of duty , to "run through walls" for that leader etc. Those leaders are generally held up to have better leadership qualities than the rest. It doesn't mean that followers of all others that may be in a leadership role are feckless wasters it just means that they haven't been persuaded to go the extra mile. If that's what Seb is saying then it seems a reasonable point. Whether it's right , who knows. I don't think currently anyone knows why nothing seems to change with us despite changes of ownership , management coaches and players.

Ah, so your main issue with Sebasteeno is that he hasn't just stuck to blind tribalism? He shouldn't ever consider our players to be capable of such a thing, but suggestive hints and leading questions to Rovers fans about their players not wanting to play is absolutely fine.

You have saved me a post,as you've summed it up perfectly.

Exactly. What's happened in this thread is that there are obviously many very unhappy people atm, and one person has said something slightly inflammatory. I personally think that the source it came from has coloured how it's been interpreted, and the reaction has been a bit OTT as a result. Had someone else posted it I think it might have panned out quite differently.

Not at all. Hardly "blind tribalism" to defend players against accusations they're sacking it off when fit to play.

Yet you are happy to wonder where Bailey is

This was all clarified by Chester yesterday, back for Widnes game.