I can see your point but I suspect this was about lodging in the public's mind that we are severely depleted so f we get a caning in this game and drop out of the 8th it helps manage the 'same old Salford' response

It's hard for some to get how hard it is to rebalance the low expectations of the Salford public. After the opening against Warrington I went for a few pints. Half a dozen people asked me the result and when I said we'd lost they all said separately 'I thought they were supposed to be good now'

We'd lost to one of comp favourites away by 14 points. So not great but not a bad result by any means. But to the Salford public it's just further proof about how crap we are. We're in the top 4-6 and can still only pull in 3-4k. I think it's hoped that if people are aware of hoe depleted we are the response might be 'not a bad result considering.....' Rather than 'Salford always get beaten'

Admittedly may make some think Salford are badly run of they're struggling to get a team out but I guess that's the marketing gamble?

it's not often a squad is stripped so thinly, but 4 of those are of Salford's own making....and why should Hull or any other club have to wait til Salford have enough players to compete, why should another club be punished?

i'm damn sure Salford have 17 players throughout their first team squad and U19's to be able to fulfill the fixture, if they lose then tough, it's the way of the world.

It's still 3, not 4, out of 17 missing, as has been said earlier but don't worry about mere detail. And most Salford fans agree and state repeatedly that we have to suck that up and we are even more ed off with the 3 who picked up long bans than we already were

No-one thinks another club should be punished. Most agree we shouldn't have asked. I'm not sure what harm if does to ask, however pointless. Salford are not trying to break any rules, force something to happen, force a club to do something they don't want to or disadvantage anyone. We asked, Hull said no, we accepted it and will get on with trying to find 17 players to put out. If you read other posts you might see why we're struggling to get 17

enter the RL www.newsnow.co.uk/A/770259843?-4338:2393

enter the RL www.newsnow.co.uk/A/770259843?-4338:2393

If the RFL postpone this game, it will be up there with one of the worst decisions in their history and it could set a very dangerous situations in the future.

I honestly can't believe they have the nerve to ask for this. I'm sure other teams have been in similar situations and have just got on with it. Even most Salford fans think it's a stupid request to make.

Yep. I can remember a few years ago Leeds had 14 out for various reasons. I'm sure other clubs have too.

Too right, it would be a scandal. Much as I don't want you lot gifted two points, it would set a bad precedent.

Maybe we could get our game off at Wigan, we have some injuries as well.

Hull did the right thing in telling them to clear off, but don't rule out the RFL backing Salford.

Would Salford be asking for the game to be postponed if they had not lost to Leigh???

Because then the games would be backing up for them.

Because they have lost to leigh they have a few free weekends coming up in the challenge cup.

How can Salford only get 2800 (suspicious round number) on the Sunday, yet an average team like Sale get 8,129 on the Saturday? If you minus the away fans at Salfords game, there cant be many Salford fans there in attendance at all.

the RFL should laugh at the thought ..how ridiculous would it make our sport look?

a club seemingly on the up with a rich owner has to postpone a game because they haven't got enough players.

it's a very dangerous precedent to set and would be totally unfair on all the clubs who are trying to win games.

How can Salford only get 2800 (suspicious round number) on the Sunday, yet an average team like Sale get 8,129 on the Saturday? If you minus the away fans at Salfords game, there cant be many Salford fans there in attendance at all.

Clever way to bring Union attendances into a completely unrelated thread, that.

If the rfl back salford and allow them to call off the game it would make our sport look more amateur!

also as a club, fc should imo claim for loss of income form salford and the rfl, ok not expecting salford fans to travel on numbers, (200 max), but companies who have paid for corporate boxes and cant arrange due to other commitments

would harris, marwan and co be willing NOT to play chase, wellar and paterson in the re-arranged fixture!? i highly doubt it!

Having been to a number of Salford home games this season I've come to the conclusion that they either purposefully understate the attendances or just guess, as the ticket office doesn't seem organised at the best of times! The figure stated definitely doesn't match the number there, the Wigan game being the best example!

As for the team it's very disappointing to see how they've gone from beating a good Wigan to free fall in the space of 2 weeks. Honestly think the league would be better off with a strong Salford side

you could say that about any club struggling at the bottom!