Jump to content

Sat 5 Jun: CCSF: Hull FC v St Helens KO 14:30 (TV)


Who will win?  

25 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win?

    • Hull FC
      9
    • St Helens
      16

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 05/06/21 at 14:00

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

The incident really soured the whole game for me and from that point on, it was obvious that Saints would win, no matter what Hull threw at them, so went and did something more productive and enjoyable instead. Turned the game back on at half time and again full time and was astonished at the comments and attitude of the pundits, especially Wilkin. A shame really, as Saints have a few fair, decent and talented players in the team. Still, come Cup Final day, we'll all be Cas fans, won't we, if only for 2 hours.

I completely lost interest in the game after the incident and quite frankly I was absolutely finished with it after Wilkin's disgusting comments, as I've already expressed earlier in the thread so I turned it off. I ended up just doing some research for the rest of the game and didn't even bother with the other semi. Made some real progress in planning my next few holidays though! What I will say is the incident wasn't what decided the game on the scoreboard so I'm not too bothered now after having a bit of time to cool off. I'm never forgiving Wilkin for his comments though. 

Edited by The Hallucinating Goose
Link to comment
Share on other sites


36 minutes ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

I completely lost interest in the game after the incident 

I missed the games yesterday, got up early this morning to catch up on iPlayer, watched a very enjoyable Women's final, a brilliant Cas v Wire game, just stopped watching this one after this incident. Dreadful stuff from Saints.

Edited by JonM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Players pick up knocks and spill the ball all the time. Players pick up bad injuries and hold on to the ball to the floor all the time.

This was a nasty injury and it was unfortunate he didn’t manage to hold the ball to the floor, but I’m afraid that’s just the way it goes.  It’s not for the ref to decide whether a player is sufficiently hurt to justify being allowed to lose the ball.

I hope Griffin recovers well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that there's way too much OTT stuff and sweeping generalisations about Saints as a direct result of the Griffin incident which I find unfortunate.

When it happened, as I recall, there were a few Saints players with obvious concern for Griffin, some more who weren't sure how to react and the likes of Fages and one or two others appealing and celebrating.

Overall, I would probably expect a similar split down most teams' personnel had they been Hull's opposition.

As I've already stated, I think the major part of the blame lies with referee Liam Moore although who would want the responsibility of disallowing a try that didn't contravene the rules by using the "not in the spirit of the game" law in a Challenge Cup Semi Final?

His try made it very difficult for my team to win that game but, as everyone watching saw, it wasn't the difference in the end and great credit must go to Hull for that. When Connor kicked that 40/20 I felt we were then favourites, Saints looked to be only just hanging on. Regan Grace made a decision when Hull chucked it wide that could have given us the game but fortunately for him he got lucky and held on to Connor's pass.

I think I'd like the dust to settle now, forget about it as much as I possibly can, and hope that Fages receives special "hard but fair" attention when he ever comes up against Hull FC in the future.

 

 

England RU Coach Eddie Jones : "I spent a bit of time up at Hull and I like the full back there Connor, he's a tough, skilful player"

Jake Connor : "I've never played Union, it doesn't look that hard, you never say never but it looks too boring for me"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly congratulations on both sides for putting on an excellent, excited game and to Saints for reaching yet another final, as a neutral it was a super game and reminded me of rugby league in the past where both teams wanted to win and attack.

As for the Fages try my initial reactions were why hasn't Griffin took the ball to ground with him the ref won't stop play cos he threw the ball away and then well done to the officials for allowing play on and to give the try.

Personally i don't think it was bad sportmanship at all, Fages did EXACTLY what everyone off here would want their own team to do and that's play to the whistle, pick the ball up and go and score, likewise the referee applied the laws correctly, as far as i know there is no rule stating that play should be stopped if a player chooses to the throw the ball away due to injury, in the laws what Griffin did is no different to a regular knock-on and the referee therefore correctly called play on, and as harsh as it may be or sound, players get injured all the time in this sport and they manage to hold onto the ball to make it dead and stop play, i'm assuming Griffin just presumed the ref would stop the game?

I hope Grifffin make a full recovery, it's never nice to see a player injured but we can't start stopping games whenever a player decides he's in too much pain otherwise it will open up a whole raft of new 'coaching techniques' that we don't need.

All these people giving Fages/Saints/The ref stick look at it this way and give your opinions please - if Saint had stopped out of sympathy for Griffin and a Hull player picked the ball up instead of Fages and ran the length of the field (obviously unopposed) to score and the ref rightly gave it would that be any different or is it just the opposition team who can't take advantage of that situation?

Also. Brett Hodgson, class as a player and a man, agreed that Fages did no wrong - quite simply what happened to Griffin was BAD LUCK, bad luck happens to players and teams all the time and is not something you can make rules for.

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, daz39 said:

All these people giving Fages/Saints/The ref stick look at it this way and give your opinions please - if Saint had stopped out of sympathy for Griffin and a Hull player picked the ball up instead of Fages and ran the length of the field (obviously unopposed) to score and the ref rightly gave it would that be any different or is it just the opposition team who can't take advantage of that situation?

No, that would also be incredibly unsporting if the players had stopped to check on an injured player.

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Jinking Jimmy said:

Let’s imagine that this was the Challenge Cup Final and there are just a few seconds left.  A player from the side that’s 2 points in front drops the ball close to his line because of injury. Does the other side do the gentlemanly thing and allow the game to be stopped and subsequently lose the game or do they take advantage of the situation and score a try that wins them the cup? Let’s have honest answers only please.

You play to the whistle so yes you would pick it up and score, that would be the team with the possessions bad luck, there is no rule that says play must be stopped if a player sustains an injury, there's certainly not one to dictate where on the field this 'rule' should apply and with absolute certainty there isn't one to decided when to apply it given the importance of the game.

It was bad luck for Wigan when that DG in the GF hit the crossbar and Saints scored just as this was bad luck for FC, we can't decide games on whether bad luck came into play.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Niels said:

What about if Alex Walmsley runs near the line and he sees a player he had contact with go down injured? Does he ask how he is instead of grounding the ball?

No, because the contact would be part of the game and he also already had possession (he didn't get possession from the incident). His try would have sporting merit.

Griffin's injury was not caused by any player. It just happened. He lost the ball because of the injury caused to himself. There is no sporting merit in receiving possession from a player and scoring unopposed in that situation.

 

You can see from the number of people that are saying they switched the game off that this is an issue that needs addressing because if this sort of thing is "just part of the game", it's not a part of the game people like.

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, daz39 said:

You play to the whistle so yes you would pick it up and score, that would be the team with the possessions bad luck, there is no rule that says play must be stopped if a player sustains an injury, there's certainly not one to dictate where on the field this 'rule' should apply and with absolute certainty there isn't one to decided when to apply it given the importance of the game.

It was bad luck for Wigan when that DG in the GF hit the crossbar and Saints scored just as this was bad luck for FC, we can't decide games on whether bad luck came into play.

1) No one is arguing it was against the rules. They're saying it was not sporting. And it wasn't 

2) Comparing hitting the post to a serious injury is pretty absurd.

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Spidey said:

This is where a better referee would have known what was going on and stopped play

Surely a better referee would've done his job and applied the rules, which he did !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Pigeon Lofter said:

A few years ago I was chatting to one of my daughters boyfriends about League when he recounted watching the Wigan Saints Grand Final where Ben Flower battered a prone Hohaia while he was unable to defend himself, it had become locked in his memory and he offered it up as his first observation about RL. He (wrongly) thought that kind of behaviour was typical of League.

I'm pretty sure if he was watching the BBC today and observed  the Fages "try" that he would have thought that his opinion all those years ago wan't too far removed from the reality, that sportsmanship in RL is an arbitrary and occasional value not widely upheld. 

Just a thought how these events can leave a lasting impression on people. Looks bad for the sport when that kind of try is celebrated and the coach and captain refused to do the right thing afterwards.

 

How do you know they refused? were they asked to do so? they may have been i don't know.

It seems it's only fans on social media that seem to have an issue with it as the coaches/ex-players/players involved don't seem to be kicking up a fuss about it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done to Saints in what proved to be an enthralling contest.  Final score didn’t reflect the closeness of the battle. Took their chances first half and imo that was the difference with the fatigue created towards the end of the match just a bit too much for Hull to convert their momentum into a winning score after getting back to a 3 point game.  

Disappointed, obviously, but we were left to rue the same traits that cost us last year. Patience close to the line and counting heads in defence.  I don’t know if it’s a communication issue (I think it is) but Grace first try had Fonua’s side overloaded for far too long before he scored.  That shouldn’t have happened so early and I believe Connors pass out into Graces hands, which killed the game, wasn’t really on.  Time and momentum was still on our side.

Never the less I thought Satae was tremendous.  Houghton, Ma’u and Connor were close behind and the overall effort from Hull was recognised by the fans at the game.  Great to see Cameron Scott cross the whitewash.  That will have given him confidence.  Wellsby (what a talent) and Knowles showed their real class for Saints.

Commiserations and Hull fans thoughts will be with Josh Griffin though.  I hope the prognosis isn’t as serious as it might be.  My best wishes to him for a full recovery as soon as possible.  

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

 

You can see from the number of people that are saying they switched the game off that this is an issue that needs addressing because if this sort of thing is "just part of the game", it's not a part of the game people like.

And some of the rubbish Connor gets up to often isn’t part of the game,do Hull fans  switch off ?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Old Frightful said:

Had Griffin suddenly suffered a cramp spasm and the result was the same as today, but he received treatment and carried on, then fine, no problem.

But he threw the ball down, collapsed in agony, had assistance and concern from "some" Saints' players, and was eventually carried off the field.

After the try was scored, the referee could have called time off, seen the seriousness of the injury, discussed it with the VR and both captains, and then disallowed the try with a play the ball to Hull or a knock on with Saints possession.

I don't think that's an intolerable burden, I would say it's common sense and a decision few could argue with.

By disallowing it that is unfair on Saints then and we've opened up a whole new debate on players decided when to take advantage etc.

It was simply BAD LUCK that's all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

It literally is about the laws of the game. If referees are given free rein to make up their own, we have no sport.

Advantage is at the discretion of the referee so he could have blown up for a knock on. It doesn’t have to be given

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had a look at the laws of the game. There’s nothing about sportsmanship, as we all know, in them. 

The only one I can see being any way relatable to the incident in question is when a referee blows their whistle; 

(f) when any irregularity, not provided for in these Laws, occurs and one team unjustifiably gains an advantage

Did we gain an unjustifiable advantage? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hela Wigmen said:

Outlaw offloads then. 

You’re trying very hard to justify a try being scored after a player with nobody around him rupturing his Achilles speaks volumes. Just saying rules are rules is totally missing the point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

1) No one is arguing it was against the rules. They're saying it was not sporting. And it wasn't 

2) Comparing hitting the post to a serious injury is pretty absurd.

I'm not, i'm comparing instances of bad luck, which they both were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Spidey said:

You’re trying very hard to justify a try being scored after a player with nobody around him rupturing his Achilles speaks volumes. Just saying rules are rules is totally missing the point

Yes, laws are there to be used and stuck to. There’s none there that relate to “sportsmanship” that is the very flimsy argument we’re seeing against the try being given. Without the laws or with referees making their own up or giving their own twist to others essentially makes the laws worth nothing at all and the sport is dead at that point.

It says more about people on here that they’re making accusations of bias and illegal activity around certain players, clubs and referees but that’s rugby league. If you don’t like something, abuse the referee or the sport altogether and make sweeping accusations that are baseless and incorrect. That’s the Rugby League way. 

It’s interesting that the Hull fans were pretty quiet when Sneyd headbutted Walmsley and Connor elbowed Naiqama. Must be some sort of bent behaviour, everything else is. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Spidey said:

It isn’t always about the rules. Especially in this case

We complain when ref's don't 'do their jobs' and now were saying they shouldn't?

"Rugby league match officials are responsible for fairly enforcing the Laws of the Game from a neutral point of view during a match of rugby league football and imposing penalties for deliberate breaches of these Laws" 

or are we now saying officlals should choose which situations they apply the laws to?

Edited by daz39
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...