Terrible decision.

Should have won that. No way was that challenge a penalty.

Whiting shows us again why he isn't good enough to play in the backline for us. His speed kills him and the communication between our back line was poor and for me the full back has to the majority of the blame.

It might not have been, had Washbrook got within a bus stop of challenging

Sorry Standee but i disagree. You cannot blame Whiting for that.

Only one thing pathetic about this thread, think we all know who that is, in the middle of the game aswell.

I wish you would go off and support Widnes.

Great game of RL, I thought we where the better team expect the first 20 minutes of the 2nd half.

Saints had a couple of star players(Roby and Wilkin) who pulled it out the hat tonight.

Ganson made some shocking decisions, nearly cost us the game.

What was sharp doing on that kick off. He was miles out of position, if he'd have been strod by the back corner flag that ball was bread and butter. Had this been the case no drop out and no dubious terribly incorrect penalty and you'd have probably held on for the win. Unlucky, robbed is the only word I can think of to describe that

Spot on Kosh, St's were always going to come back at us but we allowed them to dominate far to much for far to long in the middle of the game. Agar didn't recognise this and should have got O'Meley, Moa and Manu back on sooner than he did IMO. A point dropped for me.

The game changed on the back lines poor catches, he wasn't the only reason we didn't win today but he's one of them.

We was robbed a point feels like a loss

Ridiculous comment, TBF I expect better from you.

What? If he hadn't collided with the Saints player the ball would have dropped neatly into his arms. I'd say that's challenging for the ball myself.

Watch it again. There's no way in the world that Washbrook was seriously challenging for that ball.

We put the cue on the rack at 18-0. Our kick collection & return was woeful in the 2nd half on both sides of the pitch.

The saints player took that ball three feet above Washy's head. He jumped for it, Washy didn't

No we carried on playing the same game apparently. I agree with you cod'ead we thought we had it won and tried to play a safety first game. Reminds me of Huddersfield & Bradford last season, game won at half time and in one we threw it away trying to defend and in another we got lucky.

It would have been a penalty for offside anyway.

Yep we totally switched off at 18-0, withdrew all the big guns and lost our go forward.

Like I said, I think you are completely wrong on that - how the hell is he supposed to compete for the ball? His eyes where on the ball, his arms where out ready to catch the ball and he made no attempt to tackle the player whatsoever.

The rest of your post I completely agree with.

So it’s illegal to catch the ball without both feet in the air?

If he'd got himself airborne, I'd agree he would have been challenging. He didn't.

How?

Did Washbrook touch the ball?

If so how can it be a penalty (for taking him out), he must have been challenging for the ball if he touched it?

I think he probably did challenge for the ball tbh. You Hull fans are wanting the rules to be applied correctly - if Ganson was correct and ruled Washbrook played for the ball, it would have been a penalty to St Helens for offside anyway, so it didn't matter.

I would have too see it again, but I don't think Washbrook touched ball.

We can argue all day about this, the majority 50/50's didn't go our way today, all seems to even itself out in the end.

We tried to defend our lead and lost the intensity and go forward that had proved so successful in the first half.
We looked nervous when in posession and made me nervous when defending.
If we had stuck to the first half game plan than today could have been so very different, when we spread the ball wide, stretched their defence and attacked their right constantly we looked a real threat.
All of that was forgotten in the 2nd half.
Definitely a point lost for me today.
As for Washbrook I thought he was challenging for the ball and rather unlucky but as this thread has proved it is all open to individual interpretation.
Ganson did not help but he can in no way be blamed for our 2nd half performance.

Yep (I'd probably have to see it again too

)