Jump to content

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

i always wonder why a few blokes are called garry instead of gary? why the need for the extra r when one is clearly enough, you wouldnt call someone brrian or marrk or brrendan would you?

Or johny, Jonny Johnny ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Calling that try a fluke is a disgraceful description of something we as a sport pride ourselves on, and thats not giving up, chasing everything to the final second of the game, pure effort after 80 m

The tragedy of a man who looks weird with a moustache but even weirder without one. 

No Johny.

On 30/11/2020 at 11:48, Eddie said:

It was a fluke for him to spot the opportunity, get past French and touch the ball down without his body going out of play? I’d like to see you fluke that. 

You sound like Eddie Waring.After the 1982 challenge cup semi final,which we lost to Widnes after a Mick Adams drop goal attempt hit the crossbar and bounced out into the arms of a Widnes player to score the winning try he famously said that he had been practising that all week. That was a fluke and so was welsbys effort,but fair play to the lad to chasing it and getting it down. And yes it's 38 yrs ago and I've never got over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Loiner said:

You sound like Eddie Waring.After the 1982 challenge cup semi final,which we lost to Widnes after a Mick Adams drop goal attempt hit the crossbar and bounced out into the arms of a Widnes player to score the winning try he famously said that he had been practising that all week. That was a fluke and so was welsbys effort,but fair play to the lad to chasing it and getting it down. And yes it's 38 yrs ago and I've never got over it.

I don’t see how you can say it was a fluke, he knew what he was trying to do and he got the better of French. The ball bouncing like that was a fluke but him scoring the try definitely wasn’t, though we can agree to differ 👍

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Eddie said:

I don’t see how you can say it was a fluke, he knew what he was trying to do and he got the better of French. The ball bouncing like that was a fluke but him scoring the try definitely wasn’t, though we can agree to differ 👍

All the efforts of Welsby were no fluke he did remarkably well and I praise him for the foresight he had, what I mean is the way the ball arrived in his hands, apologies if I didn't make myself clear.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Loiner said:

He never got over him leaving Hull have you ?

Haha, just about.

Some years ago, me and a few pals went to a TotalRL organised NZ v GB test match screening breakfast event at the George Hotel in Huddersfield. Garry was special guest and was asked for his prediction. Kiwis to win by about 30 was his guess. Everyone there booed at him, in good nature obviously. A chap called Sam, who was curator of the RL Museum there at the time, had arranged the breakfast morning and did a fun impromptu quiz on a microphone before the game. One of the questions was "Who's the only GB player in RL test match history to score four tries in a game against the Kiwis?" A few seconds passed with nobody answering so I offered "Some prat sat at the front!". Sam replied "Some prat sat at the front?, yes it was Garry Schofield!" He saw us in our Hull shirts sat at the back and took it in good spirit.

Fortunately.

 

                                                  "Son, can you play me a memory, I'm not really sure how it goes,

                                   but it's sad and it's sweet and I knew it complete, when I wore a younger man's clothes"

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

You may conceivably be more intelligent than Garry, but I doubt very much whether you are as knowledgeable or insightful about Rugby League as he is.

Obviously i wouldn't, but that didn't work out well for him as a coach did it. I would know far more about the history of Rugby League than him.

Perhaps you are not fully aware of how despised he is from international players past and present and the Rugby league community as a whole.

You must be fully aware of the acrimony towards him on these boards, and what fans who post on here and attend games think of him.

I think it's best we leave it there

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RP London said:

just thinking allowed.. if Bevan French had booted it clear on the volley and it had gone between the uprights and over the bar... would that have meant the drop goal stood? I'm guessing as long as it hadnt hit the floor it would... 

just a hypothetical, i know he probably wouldnt have got there on the volley etc etc etc but just reading your post made me wonder.

No, as soon as it touches something (other than the post) it is no longer an active drop goal. Eagle eyed viewers on Twitter noticed that the ball (after hitting the post and hitting the pitch in front) actually bounced over the posts, with many questioning if that counts. But again, because it's hit something other than the post, it's no longer an active drop goal attempt.

Anyways, it's not bounce that he should have booted, it's the second bounce he left to try and regather.

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Future is League said:

Obviously i wouldn't, but that didn't work out well for him as a coach did it. I would know far more about the history of Rugby League than him.

Perhaps you are not fully aware of how despised he is from international players past and present and the Rugby league community as a whole.

You must be fully aware of the acrimony towards him on these boards, and what fans who post on here and attend games think of him.

I think it's best we leave it there

To be honest I and others in the Leeds areas admire him and have done since he started at Parkside. 

I like to read his columns as he expresses a different opinion. All sports have columnists who are critical or controversial at times and they stimulate discussion. 

Martyn wouldn't employ him if he wasn't extremely competent. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Future is League said:

Obviously i wouldn't, but that didn't work out well for him as a coach did it. I would know far more about the history of Rugby League than him.

Perhaps you are not fully aware of how despised he is from international players past and present and the Rugby league community as a whole.

You must be fully aware of the acrimony towards him on these boards, and what fans who post on here and attend games think of him.

I think it's best we leave it there

You make some quite outrageous statements and then say it's best to leave it there.

If you want to claim to know more than Garry about the history of Rugby League, then come out from behind your forum identity and reveal who you are and then we can all make a judgement about your claim. If you happen to be Professor Tony Collins, for example, or Robert Gate, then I would accept your claim, but somehow I don't think you are.

And I'm fascinated to see that you somehow know what current and former international players think, as well as "the Rugby League community as a whole". I'd love to know how you have accumulated all that knowledge. I've been involved in Rugby League for most of my life, but I wouldn't think of making such a sweeping claim and I'm interested to know how you feel able to do so.

Of course I'm aware of the acrimony of some people on these boards towards Garry, but certainly not all, and probably not a majority. And in any case the people who post on messageboards frequently post because they are unhappy with some aspect of the game or some people within it, so I really don't think it's a representative sample.

And if there are people who apparently dislike Garry as much as you suggest, then I'm afraid it's their problem and not his.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lapsed Leeds Fan said:

I wonder if I've read a different article to most of the posters on here. Here are a few quotes from Garry's piece:

"Bevan is a brilliant player"

"Fair play to Saints and Jack though, because he spotted an opportunity and went for it."

"It’s those little details that make good teams into really good teams."

"And fair play to Tommy, because without his excellent kick, the subsequent chance wouldn’t have been there."

"I thought Wigan were the better team in the final 15 minutes"

"As for it being one of the greatest games going, as some have said, I’m not sure I’d go that far"

"It was certainly absorbing"

"both sides were strong, but Saints just had the edge"

It seems perfectly reasonable and balanced to me.

I agree with some of Schofield's articles and disagree with others. But I always try to read the article and form an opinion on what he has written rather than instantly making a judgement based on what I think I might read.  I also value the opinion of someone who has been there and done it whether I agree with him or not.

 

Great post and as for those Schofield comments,nothing outrageous or controversial for me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Great post and as for those Schofield comments,nothing outrageous or controversial for me.

I agree, no problem with his thoughts on the game. It was two good sides giving there all with no quarter given. With the score being close as well it made it compulsive viewing. If it lacked anything it was probably a lack of flair in the half backs just to break the defence either way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

You make some quite outrageous statements and then say it's best to leave it there.

If you want to claim to know more than Garry about the history of Rugby League, then come out from behind your forum identity and reveal who you are and then we can all make a judgement about your claim. If you happen to be Professor Tony Collins, for example, or Robert Gate, then I would accept your claim, but somehow I don't think you are.

And I'm fascinated to see that you somehow know what current and former international players think, as well as "the Rugby League community as a whole". I'd love to know how you have accumulated all that knowledge. I've been involved in Rugby League for most of my life, but I wouldn't think of making such a sweeping claim and I'm interested to know how you feel able to do so.

Of course I'm aware of the acrimony of some people on these boards towards Garry, but certainly not all, and probably not a majority. And in any case the people who post on messageboards frequently post because they are unhappy with some aspect of the game or some people within it, so I really don't think it's a representative sample.

And if there are people who apparently dislike Garry as much as you suggest, then I'm afraid it's their problem and not his.

I’m literally applauding (in between typing). Well said Sir.

My main sport is football, but I’d have paid to have watched Garry. He was a maverick, so the final (while very absorbing, and with a great finish) being a defence dominated arm wrestle it was understandably not exactly his cup of tea, nor was it the type of game in which he would have thrived. I don’t see much wrong in what he said. In fact I’d endorse much of what he said as I’ve been advocating more of the type of flamboyant rugby that Schofield served up. 

RL needs more personalities. I’m baffled when people like Garry voice their opinion only to be hammered for doing so from various quarters. Brian McDermott is another one who is good value for an opinion. These people should be cherished.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, DC77 said:

nor was it the type of game in which he would have thrived

Far too much discussion of one individual former player, pundit or whatever.

 

53 minutes ago, DC77 said:

These people should be cherished.

I think they are by the ones that matter to them.

I think that Garry may well have served one purpose in all of this I'll stop calling him Gary.

trayodasha-kula = image.png.ee0bb2be98badfd4cc6ff4395bca5f4e.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

No, as soon as it touches something (other than the post) it is no longer an active drop goal. Eagle eyed viewers on Twitter noticed that the ball (after hitting the post and hitting the pitch in front) actually bounced over the posts, with many questioning if that counts. But again, because it's hit something other than the post, it's no longer an active drop goal attempt.

Anyways, it's not bounce that he should have booted, it's the second bounce he left to try and regather.

yes agree he should have booted it after the bounce.. 

Once its bounced its hit the floor, like if it dribbled up it has to clear it without bouncing after he has kicked it.. my thought though was that it can be "touched in flight" in an intended charge down that actually pushes it over the post so would this count in that sense.. interesting that it probably doesnt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RP London said:

yes agree he should have booted it after the bounce.. 

I think Garry Schofield's a bit old to be considering that as an option.

trayodasha-kula = image.png.ee0bb2be98badfd4cc6ff4395bca5f4e.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, The Future is League said:

Obviously i wouldn't, but that didn't work out well for him as a coach did it. I would know far more about the history of Rugby League than him.

Perhaps you are not fully aware of how despised he is from international players past and present and the Rugby league community as a whole.

You must be fully aware of the acrimony towards him on these boards, and what fans who post on here and attend games think of him.

I think it's best we leave it there

Do you have evidence that he is despised by players, and how many players exactly? Is it 100, is it 1? I've met him several times, often in the presence of other ex players and never once seen any animosity towards him, if anything it is completely the opposite. He is a loud mouth and is opinionated, I`m pretty sure even he would admit to that but that doesnt automatically mean its a bad thing. He is incredibly knowledgeable about the game and has a genuine love for RL, though this can see him wanting the game to be more like the "old days" of more open rugby, less formulaic etc. 

As for his coaching stint, are we now to ignore anyone opinion if they "failed" as a coach anytime? So basically almost every single coach the games seen then, how did your coaching in the game go?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dkw said:

Do you have evidence

I just wanted to point  out where you went wrong with your question dkw.

Any evidence? On a forum? On't 'interweb? For social media?

 

trayodasha-kula = image.png.ee0bb2be98badfd4cc6ff4395bca5f4e.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Oxford said:

I just wanted to point  out where you went wrong with your question dkw.

Any evidence? On a forum? On't 'interweb? For social media?

 

Do you have evidence I asked for evidence eh....eh...

 

Oh hang on, yes you do, ######.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, The Future is League said:

Obviously i wouldn't, but that didn't work out well for him as a coach did it. I would know far more about the history of Rugby League than him.

Perhaps you are not fully aware of how despised he is from international players past and present and the Rugby league community as a whole.

You must be fully aware of the acrimony towards him on these boards, and what fans who post on here and attend games think of him.

I think it's best we leave it there

I have been on this site for over 9 years and in that time I have read some outrages  statements and claims that I find impossible to believe.

Unless you can substansiate these assertions you make with written evidence and proof I will take it that you have fabricated these 'facts' and they are just a figment of your imagination to make you feel better in a discussion you have clearly lost.

Please don't leave it there, tell us how you have been made aware of these actualities?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, let me get this right, Sadler is upset that people don’t agree with a man that he’s openly said he doesn’t always agree with? I’m finding it hard to see why this thread is still going. 

Schofield, Sadler and League Express have gotten what they want, yet again; exposure. Whatever Schofield’s wild claims are this week, people are talking about them here and that’s, really, one of the key reasons he’ll be employed to do what he does. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hela Wigmen said:

So, let me get this right, Sadler is upset that people don’t agree with a man that he’s openly said he doesn’t always agree with? I’m finding it hard to see why this thread is still going. 

Schofield, Sadler and League Express have gotten what they want, yet again; exposure. Whatever Schofield’s wild claims are this week, people are talking about them here and that’s, really, one of the key reasons he’ll be employed to do what he does. 

I'm certainly not upset that people disagree with something that Garry writes. I'm happy for people to do that every week, if they want to.

But what I have tried to do here is defend Garry from some of the misinterpretations of what he wrote, as well as some of the more personal attacks on him.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DC77 said:

nor was it the type of game in which he would have thrived.

Why ever not, he is from a dead breed of No 6's who had the abillity to unlock defences with ball in hand, since he finished for me (my opinion) there has only been two other stand offs who dared or better still had the skills approaching Mr Schofield those being Lee Briers and Paul Cook, if any of those teams on Friday had a Garry Schofield in his pomp playing for them they would have been far better equipped to prise open the opposition's defence.

Just saying.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

So, let me get this right, Sadler is upset that people don’t agree with a man that he’s openly said he doesn’t always agree with? I’m finding it hard to see why this thread is still going. 

Schofield, Sadler and League Express have gotten what they want, yet again; exposure. Whatever Schofield’s wild claims are this week, people are talking about them here and that’s, really, one of the key reasons he’ll be employed to do what he does. 

It's all for free on here Hela.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...