Thought you battled well especially after the two early tries you conceeded.
Some of your younger players showed promise.
Your player really should have run straight and he would have scored second half. He seemed to totally freeze and virtually stopped allowing himself to be tackled
Also who was your big forward did not really resemble a modern rugby player. I thought you had brought Neil Baynes out of retirement
I think any club would have struggled with so many players missing but credit for competing for the full eighty minutes

A disappointing, though not entirely unexpected result, but I thought the young players performed well. The lethargy came from many of the so called senior players, who seemed to think the match to be a lost cause, so why bother. The number of missed tackles was definitely a concern.

But, as has already been pointed out, we didn't concede the most points this weekend, despite playing the top of the table.

Of the youngsters, I thought Hope, J Walne and Davidson stood out. In fact I think that they outplayed those that they replaced.

I wasn't there.
Who was he referring to?

I think he means Alex Davidson.

I've really no idea. My recollection of Baines is of a relatively short, stocky player. I can't think of any of ours that fell into that category

Alex Davidson is 6 feet 3 and 17 and a half stones. He doesn't match my memory of Baines.

None were very Baynes like , Adam Neal ?

average age of the team that finished the game ( with Wild & Godwin absent ) was 24, including 32 yr old Mcgoldrick.

One of your players I think came on as a sub. Just looked a little on the large side for a modern rugby player and looked in need of a bit of conditioning. He had a high number on his back so obviously not a regular.

Anyway, despite all of that, let's put things in perspective. This season we have conceded 825 points in 23 matches. That's an average of 36 points. Yesterday's performance against a top of the league team was still better than some of the early season performances, even though there were a number of less experienced players in the side.

Watching live then seeing the highlights later, I am convinced Huddersfield scored 2 from forward passes and one by a player who was in front of the kicker. There was also a little fortune in the first two tries, but, as they say, the harder you work, the luckier you get!

I also believe that our pack was dominated in the first twenty minutes, but that wasn't down to the younger lads either. Also, in all, I think we bombed 3 more scoring opportunities.

With a little more luck, a little more experience and a little more vigilance from the touch judges, it would have been a closer match.

What disappointed me was that the impression I got from some of the, so called, experienced players, that the match was a lost cause, so why bother? The marker defence was significantly inferior to that of Huddersfield and the defensive line barely moved up to defend thereby allowing metres to be gained and plenty of space to put on plays. With the ball, because Huddersfield's defence was that much better, we rarely got over the advantage line, particularly early on. In my opinion, we didn't stand deep enough from the ruck to enable us to either put on a play, or gain some momentum with the ball. Taking the ball flat is one thing, taking it stood still, against a quick and determined opposition, is suicide!

Most of the lads had high numbers, so that really doesn't narrow it down. But when did rugby league stop having large players? Would you not consider Crabtree to be large?

On the whole, if you look at SL compared with Championship, particularly in the forwards, the difference between the two is not necessarily their skill level, but their size. And by that I mean that the SL packs are generally bigger.

Just ahint of pedantry in my post, Nankivell, as I think your resume of the match is excellent:
"a little more vigilance from the touch judges"
touch judges do not indicate forward passes or off-sides.

In my view they should (and they have a way of indicating such to the referees) but many referees do not use them enough.

We regurlarly give forward passes and we make the referee aware of any repeat offenders of offside.

We will advise if there is a repeat offender of off-side, and we will be constantly talking with the winger / centre to endure that line is back onside. the refeeree can normal hear this and player normally respond well to this, this should then let the ref concentrate on the ruck.

BUT final call is always with the referee.

Touch judges also give knock ons, touch, on side/off side on kicks.

T Js are then, obviously in the wrong positions to see forward passes, there are that many missed in a game. Watching the highlights on tv, huddersfield scored off 3 forward passes. How more in the game were missed. Also in all the other games shown on the highlights there was plenty of forward passes missed. Wrong positioning by match officials

Touch judge:
Touch judges watch play from each touchline

Two touch judges are used in a rugby league game. They move along each touch line following play. Their main function is to judge when the ball or a player carrying the ball has gone into touch. They also stand together behind the goal posts to judge whether conversions or penalty kicks at goal have been successful.

Touch Judges' signals:

The touch judges cannot stop play but can signal the referee to enable them to assist the referee.

Note that the key words there are "can signal" - not "will signal" - as I understand the framing of the rules all the TJ can do is flag for ball in touch and foul play. A good referee will use his TJs to assist but certainly doesn't have to!

Bubble, I applaud your TJing but it seems to be the exception, from my watching Salford and other games over many years.

I did take my ref's exams in the last century so I do not have the normal speccy derision of refs.