Sun 23rd Feb: The Betfred Championship Match Thread

[DoubleD]

8 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

He's a Leigh lad!

Makes it even more impressive when you consider he’s had such a difficult and traumatic upbringing 

[Spidey]

2/2 for Widnes is a brilliant start to the season for us given the opposition, with personnel missing also. Just need to keep that focus up against “weaker” opposition

[Archie Gordon]

9 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

He's a Leigh lad!

I'm not prepared to emoji like this but I gave it a faint smile.

[The Blues Ox]

13 hours ago, mickmike wilson said:

Every single thing is a bit of a stretch mate, I listen to most game or watch on Youtube & our commentators are usually classed as one of the least biased ones but today they were saying that a fair bit went against us & even called the ref out for his mistakes against Fax, Just saying what i heard.

Not sure I agree with that, Cumbrian commentators are notorious for being very one eyed. 

[JonM]

38 minutes ago, Spidey said:

2/2 for Widnes is a brilliant start to the season for us given the opposition, with personnel missing also. Just need to keep that focus up against “weaker” opposition

Two very close wins, both of which could easily have gone the other way in the last minutes. If a pass had gone to hand, or the wind had dropped at the wrong moment, we could easily be 0/2. Small margins, a game of inches etc.

[sheddingswasus]

13 hours ago, Fevrover said:

Closely run by Batley. 

Batley was a draw?

[Fevrover]

29 minutes ago, sheddingswasus said:

Batley was a draw?

Yeah as a good result. 

[Ainley Top]

18 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

No. One point each for a draw after 80 mins

As it should be️

[Ainley Top]

18 hours ago, Fevrover said:

I agree we can't complain ( a lot didn't agree with it) but we got slaughtered for it,now it's ok because their teams are using it lol.

It's not o.k. for me, far from it.

[dkw]

4 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

Not sure I agree with that, Cumbrian commentators are notorious for being very one eyed. 

There was a very special Whitehaven one for years, easily the most one eyed commentator out there, something Cox I think.

Edited February 24 by dkw

[JonM]

18 minutes ago, dkw said:

There was a very special Whitehaven one for years, easily the most one eyed commentator out there, something Cox I think.

John Cox. I don't think he ever claimed to be anything other than biased. Hard to believe he was a former headteacher though.

[maccbull_bigbullybooaza]

Scoreline flattered Bradford away at Hunslet. Hunslet completely outplayed us in the second half. I think a few players thought it was job done at half time but were lucky to take both points. 

[JonM]

20 hours ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

Away for a couple of weeks so missed this. Aston never misses against us. Good start, what was the attendance?

Wasn't announced at the match, but the website match report has it as 2203.

[The Phantom Horseman]

On 21/02/2025 at 14:47, The Phantom Horseman said:

Until about a week ago I thought Fev's game at London would be an opportunity to pad the points difference stats but it now has a very different look after London seemed transformed against Bradford and were full value for their half time lead whilst Fev are missing both half backs from last week with Reynolds injured and Herring having departed on compassionate leave. Reynolds is by some way Fev's most important player and this suddenly has the look of a very trappy game for them.

 

 

There's been the usual meltdown on Fev social media after this game and in fairness there was plenty wrong with the performance, not least a couple of howlers in the kicking game, but it shouldn't be underestimated how good London's defence was again. I think too many people have read too much into London's first game against Goole, when they were badly undercooked, and since then they have eased out the weaker players from that 17 and they didn't have an obvious weak link yesterday, I can't remember them missing a tackle all game.

Fev had 40+ play-the-balls in London's 20 in the first half and whilst a lack of guile and creativity was obvious, Fev did still throw a fair bit at London who just defended tremendously well, tackling them just short or holding them up over the line on a number of occasions.

I suspect time will show this wasn't quite such a big upset as is being portrayed, if London play like that every week a lot of teams will at the very least not score many points against them.

 

[RBKnight]

7 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

There's been the usual meltdown on Fev social media after this game and in fairness there was plenty wrong with the performance, not least a couple of howlers in the kicking game, but it shouldn't be underestimated how good London's defence was again. I think too many people have read too much into London's first game against Goole, when they were badly undercooked, and since then they have eased out the weaker players from that 17 and they didn't have an obvious weak link yesterday, I can't remember them missing a tackle all game.

Fev had 40+ play-the-balls in London's 20 in the first half and whilst a lack of guile and creativity was obvious, Fev did still throw a fair bit at London who just defended tremendously well, tackling them just short or holding them up over the line on a number of occasions.

I suspect time will show this wasn't quite such a big upset as is being portrayed, if London play like that every week a lot of teams will at the very least not score many points against them.

 

Pitchforks and flaming torches out for James Ford again ?

[The Phantom Horseman]

6 minutes ago, RBKnight said:

Pitchforks and flaming torches out for James Ford again ?

They are every time we lose. It's the "Ford in" or "Ford out" tribalism as much as anything that I find tiresome, it appears to be obligatory either to be a fully paid-up member of the fan club or to think he's the worst coach the club has ever had.

[Wakefield Ram]

1 hour ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

They are every time we lose. It's the "Ford in" or "Ford out" tribalism as much as anything that I find tiresome, it appears to be obligatory either to be a fully paid-up member of the fan club or to think he's the worst coach the club has ever had.

Think there's a lot of competition in Fev for the "worst coach the club has ever had" title

Edited February 24 by Wakefield Ram

[Fevrover]

1 hour ago, Wakefield Ram said:

Think there's a lot of competition in Fev for the "worst coach the club has ever had" title

Meanwhile over at Dewsbury  ---

[Fevrover]

3 hours ago, RBKnight said:

Pitchforks and flaming torches out for James Ford again ?

again lol.

[Fevrover]

2 hours ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

They are every time we lose. It's the "Ford in" or "Ford out" tribalism as much as anything that I find tiresome, it appears to be obligatory either to be a fully paid-up member of the fan club or to think he's the worst coach the club has ever had.

He's far from the worst.

[The Blues Ox]

I still say Fev would have made SL if they hadn't panic sacked Sean Long.

[Fevrover]

48 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

I still say Fev would have made SL if they hadn't panic sacked Sean Long.

We will never know.

[The Phantom Horseman]

1 hour ago, The Blues Ox said:

I still say Fev would have made SL if they hadn't panic sacked Sean Long.

In my opinion, we wouldn't. The weaknesses London exploited in the semi final had been evident for most of that season.

[Vyvyan]

5 hours ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

There's been the usual meltdown on Fev social media after this game and in fairness there was plenty wrong with the performance, not least a couple of howlers in the kicking game, but it shouldn't be underestimated how good London's defence was again. I think too many people have read too much into London's first game against Goole, when they were badly undercooked, and since then they have eased out the weaker players from that 17 and they didn't have an obvious weak link yesterday, I can't remember them missing a tackle all game.

Fev had 40+ play-the-balls in London's 20 in the first half and whilst a lack of guile and creativity was obvious, Fev did still throw a fair bit at London who just defended tremendously well, tackling them just short or holding them up over the line on a number of occasions.

I suspect time will show this wasn't quite such a big upset as is being portrayed, if London play like that every week a lot of teams will at the very least not score many points against them.

 

Well you predicted London would be tough after they made Bradford struggle.  Good analysis.  What are the euromillions numbers this week pls?

[The Phantom Horseman]

1 minute ago, Vyvyan said:

Well you predicted London would be tough after they made Bradford struggle.  Good analysis.  What are the euromillions numbers this week pls?

I don't think it was that hard. London dealt better with Bradford's big men than either Huddersfield in the pre-season game or Castleford in the Cup had in my opinion, and if they hadn't turned the ball over in their own half so many times in the second half they might even have beaten them.

London still aren't especially fluent with ball in hand but defensively they are really good and their completion rate against Fev was much better than against Bradford. Add that to the fact that both Fev starting halves from the previous week (notably Reynolds) were missing, along with three of the starting pack, and anyone who was reasonably well informed about both teams knew this would be a very tough game.