Only thing i can think of is to give us a different area to focus on rather than being a predictable left flank attack.

When Hame came on last year i recall him playing left, esp the game v Bradford when he upset Morrison.

just seems a move for moves sake, a sub should be a direct replacement, especially if things are going well with the current attacking structures.

If anything id rather see Whiting moved to the left and Hame stuck on the right wing

I'd bring Hame on as a like for like with Manu. He can either run the ball or use his handling skills to release Yeaman. It's a no brainer to me.

Agreed Paul. I can't understand why the whole structure changes when Hame comes on. No need for Tickle to swap sides.

Clearly you didn't see the Bradford home game last season then? He was always a nutter on the pitch, scattering defenses right left and centre, but after the KR away game, he has gone backwards. I seem to recall Agar having words with him, and since he has looked subdued and not used correctly, I'd go as far as saying that we carry him when he comes on the pitch. He should be given the ball from deep to run at the opposition, causing them some headaches, not from a standing start where my granny at 81 could tackle him.

Either we use him as the impact player he was bought for, or we dont use him at all - simples!

It's a long time since I last saw a penalty at the scrum and I bet it's as long again before I see another. Yes we were probably guilty of most of the penalties we conceded but don't try and tell me Huddersfield were angels in the 2nd half. All I ask for is consistency.

Bang on Shirl.

I have to agree. I sent a text message to my mate on 30 mins saying I was "worried as ref seems to be giving us a few decisions and that can't last." You just knew he was going to go the other way in the second half. I accept that not all the decisions are going to be wrong, but spoke to several people on way out of a similar mind, and it is the predictability of the change in the balance of the refereeing decisions that is so frustrating. I'd be interested to see the accurate stats, but gut reaction/anecdotal evidence would tell me that we had a penalty advantage in first half and a heavy penalty deficit in second and I simply don't believe that an experienced team with an 18 point advantage hasn't got enough sense not to give a shed-load of penalties away.

Don't get me wrong - the team did little to apply any pressure in the second half - Tansey's grubber, Longy's inside pass/intercepted try - but it must be difficult when you're being penalised back up the field all the time.

What did he give it for, was it for Washy not binding? if so very pedantic

Sure it was for a leg up in the scrum but it was a fair way from us down the other end.

What i meant was that he has never been a penalty machine like some suggest, barring the Rovers game he has been no worse than others in the team, strangely he gets called a penalty machine after that game but Radford is somehow overlooked and he is by far our worst offender.

I agree he is not running effectively and like a lot of forwards is stood still when recieving the ball.

a good example being briscoes' break in the second half, going un-penalised, unlike washys' in the first half when he was and he held the hudds player down far less than briscoe was.

It was for striking I believe, he had just made a mistake with a knock on call that led to the scrum so he was probably trying to rectify a mistake.

to be fair he frustrated us in the first half with his fickleness and failure to penalise hull for messing around/laying on,but in hindsight majority of the penalties were justified,discipline from both teams was poor, more so hull in the 2nd half.

What about the feet up at the scrum were we got penalized for it ..all because the Huddersfield fans sang to the ref he didn't know what he was doing ..ps that last time I saw a penalty for feet up Eric ( Sergeant Major) Clay awarded it

I heard they do a nice line in C&G glasses in your shop