I suppose if you ignore the fact both Ellis and Mini muscled their way over you are correct.

If you say so but we hardly laid a finger on Minichello so can't see how that counts as outmuscled.

Spot on for me.

I lost count of how many times possibly as high as 8 or 9 where we were gifted possession in prime areas. I've no complaints about the result I think Hull deserved the points but we should have or expected to have notched up a couple of more scores last night. Sure the stats might reflect 'honours even' on the cock up front but stood in the stands we followed your mistakes around your 30 with on of our own early in our next set too early for panic tactics

I think the errors probably evened out in the end. You bombed plenty of chances, but if we had looked after the ball better you wouldn't have had all those chances in the first place. Clark and Westerman made crucial errors, but then Shaul blew a try and one end and gifted one to Ormsby at the other.

I dont think there's too much analysis that you can do on the game. Both teams handled the ball pretty abysmally, I think Hull probably just defended a little better.

You know, for a game that is based on handling a ball ,you would think that the RL technical boffins would try coming up with a ball that is easier to hold on to. I don't think we had so many knock ons with the old leather ball.

Newer balls are designed for better handling in "summer" rugby. The problem with some of them have been that the shpae of the surface is not only better to grip, it itself grips water. Older balls were basically replaced as basically when they got wet, they became heavier and also misshaped.

The old rounder, 8 panel "super league logo embossed" ball was the grippiest ball I've ever had the pleasure to play with. Can't comment on the new ones unfortunately, but when both teams are coughing up that much ball, questions have to be asked

The who out muscled who and the who made most errors pails into insignificance for me, we keep spouting about how good the halfbacks are and yet we didn't have an end of set plan we just hoofed the ball up field and hoped for the best. This was the case last week at Stains, but last week we won and it papers over the cracks.

Gidley and Sandow can be wonderful with their attacking kicks but without the end of set defensive kicks we invite excessive pressure, this has to be addressed.

On another note when will Smith and Agar coach the team to build pressure before trying the wonder passes which end in us loosing possession?

The problem on Friday thought was that we very rarely got to the end of the set in order to put an attacking kick in. Does anyone know what the completion rate at the end of the game was? Id be surprised if either team achieved 50% or more.

Every set where you are not attacking the line should have a structured end even if its the only set you complete all match!

Couldn't agree more, i just don't think we got to a point in many sets where the structured end was used.....the ball was all too often lost, penalty given, knocked on etc etc before the kick became an option.

Having said that, the few attacking kicks we put in, if only for field position, i thought were pretty good, especially when Sandow was chasing each one down like a man possessed.