Very true. The game was to big for the ref and he didn't have the confidence to back himself hence the constant intervention of the VR. Radford intimated this afterwards.

On a separate note I've just been to Aldi and bought myself a couple of bottles of BF which I will enjoy while watching the game again. £1.25 - 5.4%.

Life is a bowl of cherries.

You'll be fine, whether that's in the middle 8s or not. You do need to keep Maguire and lunt on the field though. The obstruction try being chalked off was ridiculous and probably changed the game, but ill take it as repayment for an equally poor decision against us at Leeds. Overall I thought the difference was experience, we've played with 12 men on 5 occasions for periods over the last 12 months. We were just more patient. You have the talent, you just need time.

Just a sad Mrs B wannabe. Then you were always a little creepy with the lady posters.

Still single?

Yours against Leeds? Where’s our payback for the one we had against Leeds?

That came in the form of a ridiculous decision, that left you with 72 minutes to play against 12 men.
A gift that you failed, miserably, to unwrap.

MOD MODE.

While I have limited sympathy for WUMs who succeed in winding folk up and attract flak, as a general point to several posters, I’d be grateful if you could limit or tone down the personal insults. Ateotd, I assume it is what they want, so apart from the AUP, why give them the satisfaction? (Rhetorical question). Ta.

The way the decision was reached was a bit odd, and you can make a case for it being an ‘orange’, possibly. A tad harsh and others will get away with less for with similar, but it was hardly ridiculous.

Hull capitalised more often of the decisions that favoured them, and even with 12 were the better team.

it wasn't a ridiculous decision but maybe 10 minutes to cool down and think about it would have been right, it was very late and at the head ,a bit silly really as the ball had long gone but imo not particularly malicious so yellow card ,officials and video refs are erratic and continue to blight the game every week

It’d be nice to win a few more for confidence and general enjoyment.

But if don’t make 8th (and it looks like a stretch currently, as we might very well need to win something like 8 of our remaining 15 before the split), then the benefits of 9th vs 10th vs 11th vs 12th are pretty marginal. Assuming they don’t change the system. Obviously it’d be nice to avoid the spoon, and better still get 4 home games in the 8s. But I think after Widnes, we need to look at the table and think about how best to manage the situation.

The slight nagging doubt is if they do something odd to the structure of this part of the season to re-jig the leagues for next year. However, even if they’re changes, they’re much more likely to use the 8s to do it. MPG between 2nd and 3rd for 10 teams or between 6th and 7th for 14.

Depending how the fixtures fall the difference between 9/10th and 11/12th could be pretty big. With Toronto, Tolouse and Catalans in the middle 8s I wouldn't be fancying 4 away games as there's a good chance 2 of them could be abroad.
But you're definitely a better team than Catalans and as the season plans out I reckon you'll prove better than Widnes. Huddersfield are a bit unknown quantity now due to their coach change. But you've got enough to secure 4 home games ahead of Cats and Widnes.

There’s a balance to be struck and just ‘giving up’ isn’t a good idea, because it would be hard to turn it back on when needed. But it is about timing and, if we don’t scrape 8th, the last thing we want is a burned out squad full of patched-up or underdone players. Huddersfield in 2016 and Widnes in 2017 both dodged the MPG despite being 12th after 23 rounds and a Championship team making the top 3.

If you watch, and re-watch, and play in slow motion every incident, it is possible to see something, good or bad, that wasn't seen in the original incident.
A lot more tackles, with far worse head contact, occurred yesterday, and went unpunished, purely because there was no hold up in play for a video ref to watch them.
As has been said, neither of the officials closest to the action saw anything in it other than a big hit. and play would have continued, had the facility to replay (time and time again) the tackle not been available.
Having watched it, again and again. It is my opinion that it was not a deliberate attempt to attack the head nor was it an attempt to injure, it was simply a 'Big Hit'.
It was Bentham's opinion that it was. I accept that. I think his decision was ridiculous. That is my opinion, which is irrelevant because I have no influence on what happened.
My original point was that Rovers got their 'payback' because of that decision.
To be able to play almost the full match against 12 men, should have been a gift, which should have lead to a comfortable win.
That FC created the illusion, on several occasions, that KR were the team with only 12 men, should be of grave concern to supporters and team members alike.
Granted, if you had had McGuire, and or Lunt on the field it may have made a difference.

Sorry, I've been away so couldn't be bothered to log on here although did watch the game. You are rubbish, the ref gave you everything and you still couldn't beat 12 men. Surely sheens needs sacking ASAP?

We’ll know when it’s time when you stop calling for it, Jake.

Like houghtons no try and quinlans perfectly good try like those decisions Jake