Blind side johnny

You dominated us for the first 20 minutes and it was looking one-sided but you had no final play other than a kick; I don't think any of your players actually made a break. Once we scored with a first bit of skill our heads went up and yours went down. Eventually I ended up disappointed that you scored right at the death. There was a lot of niggle in the second half, no doubt from both sides, but your players got sucked into seeking revenge and forgetting about the game. One or two are now looking like they are relying upon past performances keeping them in the team, unless you have no other options.

Scrum half or stand off? I saw a short video clip of the Giants A team against London and he seems to prefer playing a little wider, so stand off would probably be best. Maybe with Hookem at hooker as well. Looking at the 21 that has been listed Dale will have some interesting decisions to make.

Whilst Cas have loaned players elsewhere. Why do you think that is? I trust that you aren't objecting to loan players are you?

Supper for me after the match - silk dressing gown and slippers, naturally.

The joys of retirement.

Thanks. Brain fog - post now amended.

Let's hope that the Dogs left it all on the pitch on Saturday and are slow to recover. Rams 19 - 16 Dogs Att: 1250, but will we ever know? FTS: Rush MoM: Bibby

Some folk still like it: Bulldogs’ spirit reminds us why rugby league heartlands must be cherished | Challenge Cup | The Guardian

Maybe because the interest in the Challenge Cup has been declining for ten years or more?

Evidence of my "perpetual whingeing" please. Disagreeing with you doesn't count by the way.

Mostly abbreviated so little to learn from them.

Of course. But when operational rules read as if nobody has accountability within the organisation they are almost worthless, other than as self-protection.

Its a business with, I assume, an experienced accountant. Cashflow problems don't come out of the blue and the fixtures were known about for a long time. Cashflow projections for the year, and even longer would have been prepared. Whoever is managing the business would have known about these issues well in advance.

Does anyone else read "operational rules" and interpret that as "nothing to do with us - move along now"?

He is returning from an injury, remember, so may not have been fully fit. It is a change though to be discussing which of our various options we should select. I believe there is still a discussion around the forwards and whether our veteran goalkicker is worthy of selection and, if so, where.

I think it is. I assume that the broadcasting contracts will be with the RFL and the distribution will be of a sum nett of other costs, including RFL and RFLCom. Some folk, when deriding the distribution formula are being very simplistic in assuming this just applies to the proposed deal. As I understand it, it applies to all broadcasting income to RFL. Notwithstanding current deals it should also apply to any future ones, ensuring that the lower level clubs don't get squeezed out of those by the SL mob. It is actually there to protect the interests of non-SL clubs, in my opinion.

I believe that it applies to all broadcasting income, but may be wrong.

Monday night games are simply terrible for part-time players and not so great for the fans. Thankfully there will be none under this proposal.

None, don't have Sky Sports. I will be at the Dewsbury v Batley game at 5.00pm though.

It is at ours - on local hospital radio.

My understanding is that these deals are with the RFL and the distribution from the broadcast deals as a whole is 78:13:9. In addition the speculation is that the SL clubs would look askance at Championship clubs rejecting the deal yet continuing to want to benefit from the Sky package despite not having any of their games broadcast. I can understand both viewpoints.

A nice tribute to a great player. RIP Phil.

Well, Campbell is leaving Fev.

I hope it succeeds. Is there any sort of timescale?

I was also at the game, as a neutral I must add. From the screen at the ground, of which I had an obscured view, it wasn't obvious what had happened. On watching it later on TV it was clear that Halsall was holding the ball clear on the tackle but in one hand and he simply dropped it. It was clearly a try. What is less clear is why HKR were awarded the scrum in the first instance for a Giants knock-on when the player seemed to be clearly tackled in mid air. Those decisions notwithstanding HKR were clearly the superior side especially in the halfs and round the ruck. There is clearly a fair bit of disgruntlement with Watson's coaching and team selection.