mwildcats wrote:
the replacements that leeds had to cover there injuries far outweigh in quality wise the replacements we had for our injuries,

to be fair its easier to replace your regular with more than it is to replace internationals

Dirty Pretty Thing got it spot on.

And they do realize that despite missing Sinfield and Burrow, Leeds had 11 players who came through the academy in the 17.

Wakefield, despite so called missing all their players, had 4. And they expect sympaphy.

Might be a bit harsh on the bloke because he's hardly stayed at a club long enough to nurture some home grown talent, but has Kear ever presided over a club where home-grown talent is the norm, or like Noble does he prefer to buy his ready made team in using someone else's money and hard work ?

apart from Sheffield of course...

We shall see.

Yes, we know. We aren't complaining about it.

What was your point again?

I know who I'd rather have at Saints...

Still better than paying Council Tax to live in La Wakie. I suppose you don't bother with silly things like paying bills.

We have come on leaps and bounds since Keat took over. The players coming through our academy before he came was a joke but now it's going well and quite a few are making the first team and getting there chance.

Who ever said we was robbed?

Not seen anyone say that!

Where did I say anyone did over this game?

It's the general consensus on your board that Wakey are badly done to and Leeds have the RFL in their pocket. Anyone disagrees they're told to F off or banned.

My word this is an interesting thread - whens the my Dad's bigger than your Dad line gonna come in?