Dave T

Yeah, that's where my head is, he is in credit right now, but I'm not sure whether he has the skills to deliver the strategies needed for the kind of.scenarios we are in. He does make a hell of a lot of changes when one may do.

Wasn't there an incident with McMannus a few years back where he was drunk and had his trousers down at a sponsors/commercial event, or have I dreamt that? Apologies if it wasn't him.

I dont think they are better or worse, and im not sure a comparison needs to be made. However I have a lot of sympathy with his frustration around the video decision. Smith didn't go for the ball, tackled a player when he had no right to do so, the ref called it out and then decided its fine. I think he was bang wrong. I also share GJ's frustration around the state of the rulebook and this ongoing tweaking of interpretations.

Interestingly, when you look at the performances this year, when we've had our core spine (im classing this as Dufty, Williams and Walker) we have won 4 of 6 games. Without that spine we have won 3 of 10 matches (in the league). A problem is that we went into the season with inadequate provision at 7, which we've fixed up now, but we've used 6 different halfback combinations across 2025, three different hookers, a handful of fullbacks, and our three quarter line is all over the place. Now, im not convinced by Burgess, and we do need to be far more resilient in adversity, but I must admit to being a little more understanding of our performances. I find some of the analysis a bit basic. On Sky last night they basically just said we aren't trying hard enough, and sometimes that's how it can look when things are going poorly, but I dont see it as effort. I think we are getting no consistency and are all over the place structure-wise. One of the examples Sky showed last night was Fitzgibbon not trying hard enough, and I'm not sure that's something I'd ever level at him. I think he is bust, and I'm surprised he's still playing, but never lack of effort.

I fear the damage may be done mate

Nailed it.

Really frustrating to lose to Hudds last week, particularly after seeing how they went down to Catalans. Good win today, but need to back it up.

Great try saver

That's better with the ball Wire!

I worry Wire have blown that. A fair few errors from Hull, I think we needed to capitalise on them more. Despite some great talent in attack, God we look pedestrian with the ball. For all the talk of defence, if we were making the most of the ball when we had possession and position we'd be far better of this year.

Referees need to be better in situations like that, or the rules need tightening. Awarding another six in situations like that shows the rule up as the farce it is.

Sneyd is proving to be a right liability out there in defence.

That's a try

Hmm. So that's intentional grounding.

Wire by 14.

RLCares offer the services that they offer for.those who may want to take them up on those services. Other service providers offer other services that they may need as well. I expect everyone's needs will be different.

Again, that is nothing to do with RLC.

I agree. If they've paid a $300k premium per year in the form of a transfer fee they need their head tested!

I enjoyed the match. I do like seeing a strong Leeds team. As a neutral, I always enjoyed the big Leeds games against Wigan, Saints plus the likes of hHull and Cas etc. but they've been a bit depressing for a few years (not unlike my club really), and if you get the likes of Leeds back to where they were, it will add a lot to the league. The atmosphere and coverage was really good I thought.

I think this is right. We should have really strong standards linked to pathways, maybe via central funding, but I dont think that means we can't also see more overseas players. I think some of the criticism that is aimed at overseas players is a little lazy, you can't just click your fingers and create ready made players from our towns. We know the likes of Saints and Leeds are among the best in this area, but its hardly been translating into success in recent years.

To challenge your last paragraph. Personally, I think we'll see a new TV deal of, say £25m per annum and some.modest successes on sponsorship etc and there will be back patting all round. Of course the assessment will ignore the real work that's been happening in how we present the game, drive up standards and reinvent our broadcasting presentation, decent crowds and successes like the Ashes sales. The direction of travel has been positive, its a bizarre time for a coup, but people are being cute here, they'll probably benefit from this.

It just feels like bad governance, which is an ongoing issue with RL that is never resolved. Why on earth would you have two boards with the same chair? The RFL was judged to be not fit for purpose around commercial activities, so why are we now ultimately putting RLCom back under RFL.control by stealth? Why not just have an RFL commercial department if you are going this way? Its the same old nonsense. We run a few years, decide we are performing poorly, blame the RFL (defo not the clubs!), stage a breakaway, then decide its a bit hard and there's no silver bullet so give up and let the RFL take over again. And then repeat again in a few years. The owners are clueless and out of control. But, they have money so we should bow to their knowledge.

Yeah, I'd seen them there,but in any level that seems bad business so many years ago!

That's not their role.

I think its difficult to believe some of those fees tbh.