• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Good

About XIII Ram

  • Birthday
  1. Thought provoking from Dogfather. As a Dews season ticket holder of some years, I'm certainly enticed by the £115 offer to watch Friday Super League as a supplement to Sunday afternoon Championship games. And I personally hope Dews stick to the default of a majority of games on a Sunday. It will be interesting to see the outcome if Dews decide to compete on Fridays with Sky, Rhinos & Giants - I'm really not convinced we'll be the winners
  2. Responding to a point made that the club sees higher ave. spend from fans at nights games - then perhaps the club should have the courage to implement this change. But I think that whether this is about squeezing more money out of the same or less fans or growing a new market, the 'offer' shouldn't be simply about change of day/time. There has to be a change in the value and/or quality of the product - including the game itself, pre and HT entertainment, food and drink. A game under lights will not persuade me to believe that Carlsberg is the best lager in the world and to drink more than my usual.
  3. Great if the club could have genuine expectations of increased support and revenue from evening games - but would we, for instance, really get more HKR supporters on a Friday night than a Sunday? For me one of the appealing and unique features of Championship rugby league is that it is generally played on a more traditional, easy to do (and hopefully sunny) Sunday afternoon - I like that. I see an argument for the occasional evening game to provide a different marketing offer - but the club would lose my season ticket if the balanced tipped too far to evening games.
  4. A truely terrible performance. Congratulations to Whitehaven who deserved their win - but Rams were dire, disjointed, uninterested, uncompetitive. All of the positives of the Bradford game were lost within 30 seconds of the kick-off today. Dreadfull - especially the 2nd half - but in truth we have been poor from the start of the season as anybody who saw the away games at Swinton and Oldham will know. I have no idea where the club goes next - but change in some form is required to keep supporters on board for the future - otherwise all I can see is continued decline on the pitch and in the club's financial performance off it.
  5. Guzdek for player of year. Looked good from start and gets better - he's made a handful of mistakes but does what you want a good full-back to do: positionally sound, tackles well, safe under kicks, brave and quick bringing the ball out. Impressive. Hale deserves consideration - I've always thought him one dimensional and I'm still not sure he can pass - but he's also brave, very hardworking and makes a big difference when he plays. I thought at start of season it could be Sykes - he's got class and intelligence and can score a try out of nothing - but i've been surprised by the inconsistency and how distracted he gets in berating the ref.
  6. Pryce clearly divides opinion - and cops a lot of criticism for not having an impact to match his physique, but I generally felt that Rams were better for having Pryce on the pitch. In particular I thought he was was calm and dependable at full-back and in attack was one of the most reliable passers of the ball that we had. He did a good job for us. I too hope his next career move goes well.
  7. For me the biggest and most encouraging improvement yesterday, aside from the collective commitment on display, was the speeded up play the ball and the associated strong running and/or quick, accurate passing that followed. For too much of the season Ram's ptb has been slow and thus easy to defend against. Against Bradford, Rams put Bradford on the back foot for large parts of the game.... and its just better to watch!
  8. I'm don't get the dig at the "3rd tier standard facility" - What should the standard be? When I visited I found a neat, comfortable ground, fit for purpose for the usual size of crowd in that league, and a good game day experience that was welcoming and had food and drink facilities to match most in the Championship and SL. Not much wrong with the facilities or value....and not a bad team to watch either. What the club does or doesn't do to market itself is a different story - but i found an impressive, free London Broncos monthly magazine in a local pub - which seems a good idea
  9. I went to London with Dewsbury earlier in season - and was pleasantly surprised with the set up - same price to sit or stand, its a nice tidy ground and friendly people, helped by a having a proper bar, good beer choice and decent food (- suasage baguettes!). I'll go again. I won't be going to Bulls v Rams this weekend to pay £22-£27 ...that doesn't feel as good value.
  10. A poor game for this neutral, but Cas supporters created a good atmosphere. Agree "Cas average, Giants poor" - but wouldn't blame ref, he was OK, not abysmal. Cas didn't try too hard - but generally more creative, strong running. Giants looked flat but more urgent, incisive with Brierly on ( - I was looking forward to seeing him on the pitch - why is he not getting played?)
  11. The ref made decisions I didn't agree with but he wasn't incompetent. We simply didn't have the guile or power to breakdown Fev's defence. Fev looked a team coached and conditioned by ex-Super League staff: organised, athletic, aggressive - they did the basics well with just enough creativity. They are a better side than last year. We are not. Perhaps we spread our resources too thin to be able to compete - but it would be good to see improvement to make the remainder of the season enjoyble - but i dont know how - the pack needs fit bodies but has only clicked on a couple of occasions. I would drop Kain and move Sykes to centre - but who plays in the halfs? (- the coach hasn't got the right pairing yet) - and who provides the urgency and accuracy at hooker - I agree with young un that we desperately need to speed up the ptb to help get on the front foot.
  12. Siddal were good & deserved to win. They looked stronger, fitter, carried the ball up well, made good yards, attacked with ideas & pace and defended solidly. Thunder offered little except niggle. I'm Yorkshire based so no idea if that's Thunder's 1st team, but there was no sign of the class the programme talked about - the fullback looked willing but no Thunder player stood out, except no. 26 for what looked a nasty off the ball incident for which he was sin-binned & put on report - it'll be interesting to see if it is viewed as intentional (- the Siddal player needed 10mins treatment on pitch and an ambulance). It was freezing cold but a good crowd and atmosphere. I'd like to see Thunder do well - but they were poor and didn't win any friends with their play.
  13. 3 good things about today: 1). Oldham supporters - friendly & knowledgeable 2). The ground - as tidy as promised 3). Stalybridge buffet bar - great pub, beer & sausage rolls - brilliant! The worst thing: 1). Dewsbury Rams That was a dire perfomance - but tbf a defeat waiting to happen - we've been 2nd best to Swinton & Workington and today got beaten by a much better organised, fitter side with more ideas. I'm not a coach and don't have the answers but I'm not convinced by Reynolds who lacks authority and precision in his kicking and passing - he needs more help. And while I agree with beefing up the pack, what is the point when we can't make yards and loose the ball in collision. Some of our supporters blamed the referee (- who wasn't great) - but we deserved to loose.
  14. There were quite a few empty seats at the start of the game. Empty seats both side of me weren't filled until 20/25 mins into the first half - and I think were a result of traffic problems. (It was only when the adjacent seats were filled that I realised how narrow, cramped and uncomfortable the seats are! - Still, I thought the ground looked good and full and came across well when I watched later on TV).
  15. There's good points made that the club could involve fans in the shirt design. I agree. An earlier post said players had been asked - which is good - but it's the fans that pay £40 or more...and a number, including me, would like a traditional design. The shirt is important as it's what supporters and the town identify with. Its strange that one of Dewsbury's more visible, marketable assets of a distinctive RAB hooped shirt is neglected, only to be promised for centenary occasions, and in the meantime we get nondescript 'any team' stuff. I buy them as I believe it helps the club, but the club can't expect people to keep buying something they don't want - and the club's losses on shirts suggest this. It would be encouraging if the club could ask fans for their input. Still, I'm hoping we get a nice surprise when the new kit is unveiled.