alanC
Millennium User
Rate This User: 0
 Offline
Posts: 4,081
|
 |
« on: 20 August 2009, 19:58:04 » |
|
Halifax are 12-0 down against Batly  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ironclaw
Registered User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 946
|
|
« Reply #1 on: 20 August 2009, 20:00:13 » |
|
up to now has anyone seen at team's drop as badly as Halifax's? since losing the semi to us they have only beat the froggies? something not right at fax i think another try for batley   |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
eddietheviking
Millennium User
Rate This User: 0
 Online
Posts: 3,618
|
|
« Reply #2 on: 20 August 2009, 20:14:36 » |
|
28-6 now  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
This isn’t a sleeping giant; it’s a giant!
|
|
|
John S
Millennium User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 3,039
|
|
« Reply #3 on: 20 August 2009, 20:19:55 » |
|
Down the hill in the 2nd half--Fax to win. Hope I am wrong  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If winning isnt important---why keep score??
|
|
|
alanC
Millennium User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 4,081
|
|
« Reply #4 on: 20 August 2009, 20:21:38 » |
|
you can see why they are after Brannigan, Bob is not a half back,
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
farnworth viking
Millennium User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 2,012
|
|
« Reply #5 on: 20 August 2009, 21:22:41 » |
|
Batley 32 Halifax 28. That's 5 on the run Halifax have lost now. Looking like 3rd spot for them now.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
vikingsfan
Registered User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 596
|
|
« Reply #6 on: 20 August 2009, 21:46:08 » |
|
i noticed that fax are difficult to stop with their fast play the balls in the 2nd half, but the reason why batley did so well in the 1st was they muscled up in defence and dominated virtually every tackle putting the players on the back. If we can do this in the play off's we should be able to beat them
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
King Viking
Guest
|
|
« Reply #7 on: 20 August 2009, 22:25:42 » |
|
We've missed a huge opportunity.
Just a month ago, first place looked a pipe dream.
Had we beat Featherstone and Gateshead (both winnable games), we'd have been sat comfortably at the top. I know it's all about ifs and buts, but cant help but think we've missed out.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
PeteH
|
|
« Reply #8 on: 20 August 2009, 22:30:43 » |
|
We've missed a huge opportunity.
Just a month ago, first place looked a pipe dream.
Had we beat Featherstone and Gateshead (both winnable games), we'd have been sat comfortably at the top. I know it's all about ifs and buts, but cant help but think we've missed out.
Season after season we have let sides that we were expected to beat....beat us.And cost us dearly. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reg warner
Millennium User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 2,481
|
|
« Reply #9 on: 20 August 2009, 22:47:33 » |
|
Season after season we have let sides that we were expected to beat....beat us.And cost us dearly.
In 2006 (4 league defeats) and 2007 (2 league defeats but 2 BP's) we finished in second place and reached the GF. It is what happened in the GF's that cost us. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 20 August 2009, 23:19:58 by reg warner »
|
Logged
|
Will reading this rubbish infect my PC?
|
|
|
Dan
Millennium User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 1,603
|
|
« Reply #10 on: 20 August 2009, 23:05:04 » |
|
We look like finishing in 6th place, if Fax do indeed finish 3rd this could be a result for us. Is that 5 games in a row they have now lost? Since we beat them in the NRC semi what the heck has happened to them?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sandgroper
Millennium User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 6,087
|
|
« Reply #11 on: 20 August 2009, 23:05:22 » |
|
i noticed that fax are difficult to stop with their fast play the balls in the 2nd half, but the reason why batley did so well in the 1st was they muscled up in defence and dominated virtually every tackle putting the players on the back. If we can do this in the play off's we should be able to beat them
Wonder where Batley got the idea that taking them on in the middle would work? I do wish that Eddie Hemmings and his colleague on tonights match would do some research and realise that our division is the 'Championship' not Championship 1. It just shows that they have no interest outside SL. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
paull
Registered User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 252
|
|
« Reply #12 on: 21 August 2009, 07:25:38 » |
|
It all started to go wrong after Calland hailed his team to be light years ahead of everyone else
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
LULUWOLF
Millennium User
Rate This User: 0
Offline
Posts: 1,546
|
|
« Reply #13 on: 21 August 2009, 10:16:54 » |
|
It all started to go wrong after Calland hailed his team to be light years ahead of everyone else
Was it not a country mile? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Rickp
Millennium User
Rate This User: 1
Online
Posts: 2,308
|
|
« Reply #14 on: 21 August 2009, 10:43:32 » |
|
Wonder where Batley got the idea that taking them on in the middle would work?
I do wish that Eddie Hemmings and his colleague on tonights match would do some research and realise that our division is the 'Championship' not Championship 1. It just shows that they have no interest outside SL.
Funny you should say that. I wrote a damning letter to the Boots'n'all site after the Huddersfield v Bradford match on Sunday. Saying the same thing. The way they commentate sometimes really spangles me off. He made comments that virtaully said that the Challenge Cup gets in the way of SL and should be moved. So I got on my high horse and told him That Super League is not the sport, RUGBY LEAGUE is the sport and SL is not the be all and end all of the sport, there are 2 other leagues and the Challenge cup to. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Trust in Widnes
Author