Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

755 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I was emphasising the word depleted because when ever we beat a team with a couple of players missing they get labelled depleted. Did you see our team? Shuddersfield? Really? Thanks for your time.
  2. I've turned the sound off, hearing the referee's bellowing and Wells' constant talking irritated my ears!
  3. https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2019/jun/12/womens-world-cup-shoved-down-mens-throats Fairly opinionated stuff I'd say.
  4. I wasn't meaning any disrespect to Saints, they played with an intensity and pace that we just couldn't match, my point was that there wasn't a lot in terms of "muscling up" from us, our line speed and collision was poor which enabled Walmsley and Thompson to punch holes and then when you add international world class backs up against a predominantly academy line up then there's only going to be one result.
  5. Another result to put the cat among the pigeons at the bottom, it looks like another season where the bottom of SL provides the twists and turns rather than the top end.
  6. "Depleted" Huddersfield, offered very little, at times it was men against boys, literally, at times, the "depleted" Giants had 7 academy prospects in the line up, 4 of our back 5 were all academy lads, 3 of those played in last years academy team, 2 of them are in the current academy set up, it really was damage limitation, i think most of us said, if we kept it below 50 then it's a positive. Saints weren't as good as the media made them out to be, we were very soft defensively and at least 5 tries saw no hand laid on any Saint as they scored, they didn't have to work hard for their field position, just roll over some poor contact usually. Credit to our lads though as we don't get the luxury of bleating about our injuries and having ready made excuses such as being "depleted", we stuck at it and only conceded 12 in the second half, i think Saints possibly made as many errors as we did. Overall it was a poor game played in a half empty stadium-something else we get hammered for- near silence,except for a 100 or so Huddersfield fans trying to lighten their moods, super league? nope 'fraid not.
  7. 2 failing clubs, both with assets, both with dilapidated, aged, stadiums, one, sat on prime real estate, one local authority eager to regenerate the area, a few grants and local businesses also eager to regenerate the town, it had nothing to do with Oldham's demise AFAIK and more to do with the opportunity, hard work and efforts of a few.
  8. When i first started following Huddersfield in the late 80's, Oldham were regarded as a top team, i remember games against them always being seen as big games, the 2 towns are only separated by a big hill! In the 90's there was a bit of a rivalry built up, and i remember a challenge cup quarter final n 1995 which attracted over 8,000, with a good 3-4,000 travelling Fartowners, which is still spoken about fondly with older supporters. * Unthinkable now that 8,000 would turn up to a game between Oldham and Huddersfield, 8,000 don't even turn up to any quarter finals these days! * There was also a crowd of 9,300 at the McAlpine against Halifax and 5,700 in the next round against Keighley!
  9. I think it's as Woolford keeps alluding to, mental strength, we don't appear to have any.
  10. Yes, Kruise Leeming, he did it at Wakefield earlier in the season and we got a penalty for it, I said then it was shameful, and to think he thought he could get away with it now the rules have changed was just plain barmy! I would be embarrassed if we had won a game with penalty for that kind of thing. Thank God it's almost stopped now, ironically, because of the storm around Shenton doing it in Perpignan.
  11. 1-13 starting 14-17 on the bench, would solve a lot of problems.
  12. But why would the powers that be go to such lengths as to preserve Huddersfield- a club that I've stated previously was a club on it's knees 10 years previously, and had 3 very poor seasons in the top flight over a club located in a big city/big catchment area and who won the cup so admirably at Wembley only a year or so before? that theory doesn't make sense. It would be like Sacrificing, say, Catalans for Keighley or something.
  13. In all honesty, it wasn't really a "merger" Sheffield had failed, Huddersfield had potential, the idea that Sheffield could be absorbed into Huddersfield thus creating an extra "space" in the league for a financial lift wasn't ever going to work. Either way Sheffield Eagles would have been lost.
  • Create New...