Salford have chosen to spend their salary cap on a small number of highly paid players rather than depth. They can't then complain when the lack of depth in their squad causes a problem.

Why don't they use " dual registration" players from the championship or championship 1?

Isn't that how the system is supposed to work, or as most suspect, it's a one way street.

The whole thing is a farce whichever way you look at it.

rlhttps://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/salford-plea-match-call-goes-9131700rl

Salford have taken it to the RFL

I see a threat coming on and if they back down to this, the sport becomes a joke

Maybe if Salford had looked at fitness training in pre-season rather than a lot of contact & bulking up then this might not have occurred all these knocks & injuries....

Yawn. Easy cliches

14 out yesterday, 3 off injured in the game, 2 more injured and carried on playing and we lost to you by 2 points. Good job we've got no strength in depth or we would have creamed you

I agree. Had you won yesterday I would have had no complaints.
I'd suggest that it was indeed our strength in depth that pulled us through, remember we had a number of first team players absent too.
I can't help thinking that by requesting a postponement you are almost giving the players available the message that you have no confidence in them, when it would be better to praise their effort at the weekend and get them playing to prove a point?

You had 14 missing too then did you? If we'd had a max of 8 out (inc one we'd just signed and who'd never played for us) then we wouldn't have been moaning cos that happens

I personally hope that either the R.F.L. agrees to Salford’s request or a rag-tag seventeen actually beats Hull.

Either way it will give me hours of amusement.

The V.T would go into meltdown if it was the former, or the Hull board would implode with various suggestions of how to put to death the men in charge, if the latter occurred .

No. However, this was in no small part to having no players suspended as opposed to your 4 which didn't help matters.
Therefore, through injury you were missing a further 8 (14 is the number of players you now have unavailable - it was 12 yesterday!).
We were missing Dorn, Carney, Webster, Solomona, Cook, McMeekan and Mariano through injury. At the start of the game this was one less player missing through injury than yourselves.

there is a third scenario. Hull FC stick a cricket score on Salford....twitter will be the place to be then!

He is displaying a sense of humour though....

@drmarwanK 6 hrs ago
Whilst we are at it, will ask the RFL to reschedule our magic weekend fixture against @WidnesRL as it clashes with racing at @ChesterRaces

Junior development is the answer for all Super League clubs.
Today's pain is tomorrows gain.

Don't talk daft.
Increased salary caps, marquee allowances and more foreigners....that's the Superleague way!

I don't get the outrage. They're in a bad position, have asked if the game could be rescehduled and told no. How exactly does this somehow constitute a joke? At least in effect they are telling fans who might attend to expect a hugely one-sided game. That's more than the management of some teams have done in the past when fielding ridiculously weak teams on purpose.

the way Hull have played this year, it'll probably be quite even



P.S. I'm aware they beat us!