Dave T

I don't necessarily disagree with you on that point, but in such a competitive market, we need to use positive media wherever possible. We can only assume that the 300% increase stat is true, and if it is a stat that has been used in a context that makes it a real positive then fine. I have still seen no evidence, or anything that would make me question the honesty of this statement. I agree that it would be great to see actual detail behind this stat, but just because we can't isn't a reason to doubt the honesty surely?

You can request more info and raise the point without the negativity that was attached to your post. Jeez, we all know that the 300% stat was for the purpose of grabbing positive headlines in the media, not as a full statistical report of the game in Wales. There may be other reports knocking around, or you may be able to get more details from the Welsh RL, who knows, but simply knocking it for the sake of it doesn't really do anything for the game. Okay, there may have been 1 club and now there is 4, even if that was the case, isn't that still positive?

Are you saying that the release is not true? It may give limited details (intentionally) however I have no reason to doubt the 300% stat, and if they are basing the 'fastest growing' element on that stat, then fair enough, no lies there. This isn't an academic report or anything like that, it is a release about the fact that RL in Wales is growing, and they have tried to grab some headlines with statements that are hard hitting. What is the issue here. I could understand if you were just doing further digging and asking exactly how much participation has increased by, as that would be interesting to understand, but tbh your post just comes across as negative, unnecessarily IMHO.

Yep, you are right, but aren't we as a sport guilty of not spinning things positively? Why would you turn this into a negative, what benefit is there to that at all?

double post

Yep, I am genuinely excited by all 4 games. The Saints v Wire and Wigan v Leeds games are often classics, and almost always very enjoyable games, so on their own they are crackers, but with the benefits that go with a victory it has that added excitement factor. Hull v KR always have something about them, and with it being knockout and a huge crowd, this one should be very enjoyable! I must also confess to rooting for Crusaders as my 2nd team now, so I hope they can pull off a shock against Hudds in that one to keep up the momentum that seems to be building in Wrexham.

The Saints v Wire game was made all ticket a couple of days ago, so you'd hope that sales were going well at that stage. The silence since seems to be telling though.

Good one.

Any specific examples of somebody gettng sent off for throwing a punch and missing?

Whilst this has definitely been his best season, I feel you are overstating the step-up he has made. He made his name really in 2008 when he made the Dream Team and the England Team in the WC, working his way to being a starter by the time of the semis. He was one of the few to come away with credit. He was also very good last year, I just feel he has done a few things in big games (Wigan away, and Saints at home) which has got him a few more headlines. Ever since he moved into the pack you could always see he was going to make it there.

We are better positioned to win at KR than ever before, but that means ###### all! We look like we have a fit squad, which is crucial at this stage of the season, and I am excited about having Bridge back, although I would have preferred him to have had more than 1 first team game going into the playoffs. I hope we do go all out for this one, as with Saints' injuries a loss here could stitch them up and they could even struggle against the likes of Hudds or Hull. Of course this is all wishful thinking and they will win an epic battle! I'll leave the catchphrase to sam.

Just seems strange that this is then highlighted in the press, aren't all signings and movements between clubs subject to RFL approva?. Maybe they are well aware what a cynical bunch us fans are!

Why when there's something negative is it a dreadful mistake, but then when there is a positive it is lucky?

TBH there does seem slightly more to this than meets the eye. If he is a contracted Saints player, why did they need RFL approval for this move? I have no issue with the fact that he hasn't played for them this year, we gave a lad a debut last week, no big deal.

That doesn't necessarily make sense. Just because he was provoked doesn't mean that the provocation deserved a ban. They didn't decide to call him up, so they thought it wasn't too serious.

Here are some of the notes from the initial ban hearing: The panel have taken a great deal of time to come to the decision. You have been given credit for your long unblemished record in the game and the fact that you have pleaded guilty. In our view however this was a serious matter, virtually an assault by punching a player four times to the head who was on the ground, and although your opponent was allowed to continue with the game he did sustain a blood injury. Sounds like it was touch and go, and the comments almost invite an appeal.

I think that is the case. It will be interesting to read the notes when they are published, but based on the fact that he was sent off after only 9 minutes then in effect he and his team were punished for one game already, and that is often seen as enough punishment, maybe the 2nd panel went with that view.

Yeah, those bastards beat us twice again!!!

Nah, not having that at all. Players use their arms and legs to get players off them all the time (I'm not a big fan tbh - but it happens) and players very very rarely retaliate. The fact is that Radford attacked a player that was on the ground and not looking. Whether we think it is justified based on Bailey's record is not the issue, had Bailey done the same, it would have been one described as a 'typical Bailey cheap shot'.

I disagree that they add no bums on seats. It has certainly made it more of an attractive proposition when I have tried to get people to come along with me, Madness and SFG were certainly a draw for friends. They may not be your cup of tea, but don't underestimate their value.

Whilst your constant ramblings on this are a bore, I do actually agree with you on the 5 year thing. I can understand the problem with pretty much clubs facing up to the fact that it will be 5 years before they could actually play in SL. Personally I would allow anybody to actually apply for SL, forget the ticking the box on-field although give some value to doing well. This still causes some problems with timescales, however clubs like Leigh would still be able to prove their worth and get a place next year if strong enough so the gap would be shorter. Maybe it should be 2 year franchises to help this situation too?

Yep, Scouting for Girls were very good, as were Madness. I just hope that Diana Vickers (not a horrendous choice - she is a pretty big name at the moment) has a live band behind her. I always find it cringeworthy when it is just a solo singer with no-one else around. Live bands always seem to go down much better with the crowd too, and I think that's why SFG got a good reception.

I'd rather we put full effort in and win on Friday. Ok, we have a poor record against Saints, however we also had a shocking record in the Cup until last year and now we are back-to-back winners. If we were to win, and Leeds were to win at Wigan, then we suddenly become the top seeded team. We get a week off and get to choose who we want to play. Say like last year and we get a shock in rd 2, and we could be picking from the likes of Crusaders at home. I don't see the benefits of playing the system like you say, as you are pretty much sacrificing any potential benefits that this first round offers.

No, this would be for cautions only, not where they have said there was no issue. They often put that there was a high tackle, but penalty and caution is sufficient. This caution is supposed to count against players in future disciplinaries, but we have seen players with a handful of cautions and no bans. Maybe we need a system where after three cautions in a year you are called up ot given an automatic ban.