Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DOGFATHER last won the day on May 12

DOGFATHER had the most liked content!


Member Profile

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

9,499 profile views

DOGFATHER's Achievements



  1. Excellent news, I had heard talk he was joining the police. Really pleased he is back with us for next season.


    Would you pick him instead of Hooley at FB? Maybe Hall has stated he wants to play FB regularly, and doesn't like playing on the wing or at centre? What would you do to entice him to stay?


    I read something similar elsewhere, citing Pickersgill is likely to be Fev bound, therefore Hall is likely to be a regular starter.
  4. As already stated, just one of those days. Held up over the 6 times in the first half, Hooley and Johnson let kicks bounce at least 4 times between them. The officiating wasn't good, the disallowed try was never forward, but credit must go to Haven's defending, you cannot win games against decent teams making so many errors.
  5. I hope Louis' defensive skills have not improved since he left us, if they haven't, I reckon Walshaw will have a field day running at the centre/Hb channel he is defending.
  6. Come on WR, however bad things are, and whatever the Rams are, at least you are not Sheffield.
  7. I thought the whole pack was outstanding today. I felt we absolutely bullied them. It's so hard picking a M.O.M, we were awesome again 1 -17. It doesn't seem to matter who is out, or comes into the starting lineup, we never look particularly weaker.
  8. I'm not sure about anyone else, but I'm ready to buy my season ticket for next year. I could not be happier with the re-signings so far, I wonder who the next one will be?
  9. You have my sincerest, unreserved apologies Wellsy. As I said, I had no agenda, just putting the pieces together from what I had seen and read. I guess it's true you really cannot trust what you read in the papers. I still find the situation so far fetched, it is still hard to believe. I had seen no reference to the NFP voting to disallow Hull in, as a sort of vendetta against SL, in retaliation to them refusing Hunslet.
  10. I don't know why you think I have anything to spin? I have no vested interest either way, it's not like I'm a supporter of a club that should have been relegated or anything. I've not heard, read or seen anything about the NFP voting to keep Hull out. I also find it difficult to believe that they would. I cannot fathom a reason why a chairman/BOD of a NFP club, would turn away a home game against Hull, instead of the less well supported Hunslet. This is what I read:- https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/gateshead-fold-as-league-agrees-merger-741473.html%3famp Super League clubs yesterday gave their unanimous backing for a merger between Gateshead and Hull Sharks. The move brings to an end Super League rugby in Gateshead as the newly-formed club will play in Hull. It doesn't mention anything about the lower league club's having any sort of say in the matter. They certainly haven't had any say in SL matters before or since. Excuse me for not responding to any more of your posts on the matter, but you seem to be making things up that frankly defy logic, to try and cloud what is a very "black and white" issue.
  11. Sorry Wellsy, but please enlighten me. I've no agenda, just putting the pieces together from what I can see and have read. Why were Featherstone not included in SL? They were not in a significantly worse position financially than many other clubs at that time, nor did they finish in a relegation place, but we're not allowed in SL, why if not for size? What reason do you think the rest of SL voted to keep Hull in SL, if, as you say, Hull so desperately wanted to drop down a division? Or indeed, why did SL keep Bradford in more recently? For the good of the game, perhaps? That was certainly published on both occasions. If this was true, why was it good for the game? The only good reason I can conclude, is financially. Hull have traditionally been well supported, and have fans that travel to away games in good numbers. The 4k fans you mentioned, was quite high for the time. Ask Padge if you can borrow his Rothman's year books, to see for yourself. It certainly wasn't good, if you look at it in terms of integrity, or from a moral perspective. Was it good for the club's in the NFP in terms of bringing new fans or investment in to their clubs, knowing, even if 2 teams were run so badly they went bust, they still were not deemed worthy/big enough to replace them? Hull were artificially kept up, in favour of Hunslet who had earned the right, why was that, if not based on size? Hunslet had ground improvement plans ready to go once they were given the green light, to get to the required standards, Why did the SL choose to keep Bradford in SL, throughout the various administrations, if it was not because the other SL clubs were scared of losing the income from the Bulls travelling support, or the possible damage it might do to the TV deal, losing such a big club from the top flight? I'm sorry, but as hard as I try, I cannot see any other reason other than, SL deemed them "too big to go down" Please point out where am I going wrong with my analysis?
  12. Good for you Padge, so you will already know that Keighley's attendances pre summer rugby, when compared to Goliath's like Warrington and St Helens' were not hugely different, a couple of hundred or so in them. If you need a reference, get hold of the Rothman's year books from the last couple of years prior to SL.
  13. Surely, quite a few people thought they had/have potential, otherwise why form in the first place? Do York, Newcastle, London or Toulouse own their own ground?
  • Create New...