I'm sure he knows it was meant in jest. I mean everything I say to you though

And again, the irony that Rovers fans now think that the referee is always right.

Hasn't Justin Morgan taught you guys anything?!

yeah but did i say anything about throwing it directly fom sticks to sticks direction............






and actually yeah i do understand how the momentum rule works, we have been on the recieving end of one against leeds ... it is a rule that should never of been introduced, as it open to to much iterpretation as to what is considered momentum and what is forward and should be dropped again. it creates too much inconsistency from refs as to what to deem forward or momentum

You just don't know when to stop, your like a kid in a playground that can't have his own way

When he finally crawls out of Justins I'll be sure to ask him

You seem to be getting upset my friend. Just relax and remember that whilst you may be completely wrong in this discussion you still won the match

worked in beverley for seven years would not want to live there thanks

I still work there. It really is the local place for local people.

Being on the receiving end of something does not mean you understand it. Your comment about sticks to sticks sums it up really. Even if you threw it from corner to corner, your players would still have to be faster than Usain Bolt to stay in front of it!



You do realise how far backwards a pass would have to be to be backwards relative to the ground should a player want to pass the ball whilst on the move at high speed, don't you? After all, that is a HUGE part of the attractiveness of RL: speed.

Unless you want RL players to have to stand still every time they pass the ball to guarantee it has no momentum? That would be a very boring and slow game.

The momentum rule is perfectly justified, just like any rule should be. The only people that don't like it are the ones that don't understand what momentum is. Why should we lower ourselves because a few nitwits don't understand the rules?

lighten up fella, i`m just taking the pee





and as it happens you can easily throw a ball about 50 yards diagonally at speed and still be in front of the person recieving the ball quite comfortably if you have two players of a similar speed, and i`m sorry mate but name calling just makes you look silly....

a better man rises above doing silly things like name calling

or tory boys

I am light mate, thanks! I watched a great game and Hull put out a good performance for the first time in a long while. I don't think we should have won, but the pass was definitely not forward, and I will defend that point.

So you don't think it should be changed? I don't understand where the joke is?


I think this demonstrates that you still don't understand how the momentum rule works.

Just to put things into perspective, Usain Bolt ran at about 10.5m/s when he broke the WR. Say he runs at this speed and throws a flat pass the width of the field, and it takes about 5 seconds to travel touchline to touchline, the ball would travel 52.5m forward due to momentum. Now, you are either saying it is easy to throw the ball the width of the pitch at the speed of the fastest man in the world, or you do not understand the momentum rule.




I was referring to the people that want to change the rules because they don't understand them rather than the people who just genuinely don't understand them but don't really care (which would be harsh). I find it stupid and silly that someone would rather change a rule than attempt to understand it harder, and so stand by calling them nit wits (which is what a nit wit is, a stupid or silly person!). It's not like I was calling them a to$$er

the rules worked just fine as they was before they introduced the said momentum rule dude, why change what isn`t broken..........

it was brought in because too many teams was getting pinged for forward passes and it was slowing the game down too much for sky and detracted from a free flowing spectacle which sky is after..... why also do you think that they introduced the 10m rule at the play the ball, simply to make it more open and free flowing. they are detracting from skill and abillity to speed and size, the sheer amount of injuries since the 10m rule was introduced backs this up as the impact in collision is becoming more severe.

and it is becoming more of a problem for the rugby game that sky have too much say and control over what is done on and off the field, prime examples are fixtures that are moved just for sky, these should all be pre determined before a season kicking off and no exceptions unless in extreme conditions like all the snow which forced cancellations earlier in the season.

That is a fair argument (although I think some of your facts are questionable), but I disagree. It is all opinions.
I don't agree with the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" way of thinking. You never go forward by standing still. But you can get further away if the goal is moving forward. It's a good and perfectly reasonable rule. It is just as difficult to tell whether a pass is forward or not relative to the ground with or without the momentum rule. Unless you have a perfect birds-eye view or a Hawk-Eye system like in tennis, you can't determine either.

which is basicially what i said earlier , open to too much interpretation and hence should not of been brought in

the same as the off side rule in football ,where you can stand offside as long as you don`t interfere with the play. surely by definition if a player is on a pitch he is interferinng with play as at least one opponent will be watching him.. this is an example of another daft rule all beit in a different sport..

phill clarke on sky said that the 20mtr restart is unfair on the defending teams as it does not punish a poor kick and should be a 30mtr restart, so as sky have said this one how long before it is introduced?


sky wanted a french team they got one, they wanted a welsh team they got one and now they want a sottish team so how long before they get it... as i said sky have far too much say as to what goes on in our game

Either is open to too much interpretation, so it makes no difference either way. Go with the one that allows the best rugby to be played and at speed, which is the latter.


It's not daft at all. I think the phrase is "directly" interfering with play. If he is in an offside position and not playing for the ball or interfering with any players, then why slow the game down and ping him for it? That would be daft.


Sky have said a lot of things. They don't all get introduced. And that's a good thing. I disagree with the 30m restart suggestion.


Why would Sky want a French team? They can't sell subscriptions in France. And what evidence is there that they wanted a Welsh and now a Scottish team?

How the rovers fans on here can even argue that the pass was forward, is unbelievable. I know we all take the from time to time, but the fact that you lot have actually managed to convince yourselves that the pass was forward, is incredible

Their egos won't allow for them to remember what actually happened. They do this little mental mind trick to convince themselves that something different actually happened. It's like that episode of South Park.

before catalans was inroduced it was muted for a couple of years by sky about expanding and introducing a french team and voila what happened all of a sudden a french team. who was also given a franchise for 3 years and had no fear of relegation even though they finished bottom in there first year..

because of sky celtic are in at the expense of a eststablished team

and all of a sudden the move mm to scotland and now they say it would be good to get a scottish team so again how long before his happens?

franchising is another one that should not of been brought in as it leaves teams near the bottom with nothing to play for but pride whereas relegation makes teams fight just that little bit harder, as we know from our 2007 season, and just what have celtic brought to the table ,if i`m not mistaken by far the worst team to ever grace the super league as i cannot recall a team winning less games or scoring less points , they have been rushed in and where nowhere near ready both on or off the field, hence the rfl stepping in now in there first year to give them a helping hand.

I actually thought it was for the pass before the last pass and Silverwood was just late with his whistle .

Well in that case it DEFINITELY wasn't forward.

It is not because of Sky, don't become one of the conspiracy theorists. Catalans wasn't muted for a few years by Sky, they were CONFIRMED entry by the RFL in 2002, which is why it was being discussed for the following years. Nothing to do with Sky.

If it wasn't for Sky, Hull KR (and Hull FC) wouldn't be where we are anyway, playing at the standard they do in the stadia they're in so I don't see what your problem is.

Stevo is alive and well and living in west Hull.

As Stevo makes the same basic mistakes as lots of Rovers fans seem to be making I'd say he probably lives in East Hull.

Lets lock this at the end of the day is was a blatant forward pass that is not allowed.