No issue with Ian Watson at all, done a good job thus far cheaper budget than either Noble or Harris had to work with.

We should have beaten Wakefield on Saturday too. How many opportunities did the players want/need? Difference between the two was Wakefield were clinical with their breaks/chances whereas we squandered them.

Gunner, the Warrington game we turned up for forty minutes, the same against Widnes but we held on just. So the St Helens, Warrington, Wigan, Widnes, and Castleford games were justifiable performances, however, Hull, Hull KR, Catalans, Huddersfield, and Wakefield were embarrassingly not. Getting beaten I can swallow, but winning and losing in an unethical manner to Hull, Hull KR, Catalans, Huddersfield, and Wakefield I struggle to swallow. Players attitudes and desire should never come into question. They're Non-negotiables at most clubs, yet condoned here.

RE. "winning and losing in an unethical manner".

Please explain. I cannot remember us beating or losing to a team by underhand methods (this season - before Hudd fans come on about cannonball tackles ). Also I read the various comments as reasons not excuses. The joy with watching any sport is that you cannot predict. So do not expect perfection.

I am confused by your answer. To me ethics refer to two possibilties:
1 that county where young things are noted for hair lacqer and fake tans
2 how morality is practised: I dare you to state to the players that that they are immoral.

As for the distinction between RL and "true life form" , , I must have drank too much before matches and believed that what I saw on the meadow was true to life. Oh well, at least now I can relax knowing it is all an illusion. Benthamite ethics at their best.