Author Topic: Round 10 (Read 3885 times)

Kellythorpe · **Reply #15 on:** November 13, 2022, 10:30:11 AM

Many thanks to Heath for pre match hospitality which was excellent.
With regard to game, Driff could get little ball and certainly no field position in first half because of excellent play by Heath. Two good tries by the leggy left wing were also very well taken. Perhaps the first included a few miss tackles. The only time Driff got anywhere near the Heath line was when replacement prop scored a good try which gave a flattering half-time score for Driff. The second half was a different story, Driff with more ball caused some problems and scored two further tries. They continued to try to play rugby right to the end, but only had kept the score this close by some well taken penalties by 15. Heath's 7,9,10 and 11 were outstanding in this match and at times matched by some valiant play by Driff. I agree a losing point was deserved a would have been some consolation.
With regard to the incident on the stand side of the ground, I cannot comment as I watched from the other side. What is perplexing is the two variations of what occured. One says the Driff 9 caused the blow, the other says the 9 had already left the field having been substituted and it was caused by a clash of heads from a teammate. One version must be untrue!
I have watched Mr Ounsley referee before, looking younger than his age I would assume. He is very mobile and up with play and seems to control the games well. All referees have to accept criticism from the crowd over their decisions and develope thick skin in this regard, but personal insults if they take place are reprehensible and should be dealt with.I
I couldn't understand the reference to a bus lending offer, I am sure the Driff XV arrived in good time for the KO!

neverplayedstandoff · **Reply #16 on:** November 13, 2022, 01:24:21 PM

Kelly
Thanks for your appreciation of our hospitality.

I am not prepared to add any more fuel to an already well stoked fire, suffice to say that my view is slightly different to those already posted on the incident on the field.

I will however make the following statement for clarity.

We are a very vocal crowd at Heath and as someone already said we all tend to be a bit one eyed and whilst we would not want that to stop HOWEVER , what was said yesterday went beyond that.
Those of you who were in the stand will know that an immediate rebuke was issued to the person responsible and whilst all the ground heard the abuse, I doubt that many, apart from the people in the stand, will have heard or been aware of the rebuke.

Immediately after the game the Heath member was again spoken too and they agreed to go and apologise to the referee, which they did.

The referee was also apologised too by the club president and chairman.
The above is fact as I was the person who both delivered the original rebuke and spoke to the member afterwards. As such I will certainly not be entering into any further discussion on the matter and I am sure the referee will put all these facts in his report.

As for the other nonsense from Premier, which must be true because it came from that mysterious ex Heath player, about what Heath are or are not paying their coaches. This is a matter for the Heath management team.

backrowbandit · **Reply #17 on:** November 13, 2022, 02:01:57 PM

A very refreshingly straightforward and honest post by NPS (which he always is)....an excellent example of how tackling an isolated issue head-on with openness shuts it down.

If only national politicians realised that fair people will always support that approach.

Differ Lid · **Reply #18 on:** November 13, 2022, 02:33:18 PM

Good fair response, and fair play to the Heath supporters in the stand who acted to correct the actions and to the club for acting so quickly after the game.
Genuinely shows a club who doesn’t accept that behaviour and drew a line under it so quickly!

With regards the on field incident, both sides film the game so I’m sure the footage will show exactly what happened and the scrumhalf sitting in the dugout. (Confusion might be made when the driffield scrum half made a big collision with the Heath prop in driffield half, but this wasn’t a head injury, and the Heath prop got up and continued playing after some treatment)

Premier3 · **Reply #19 on:** November 13, 2022, 03:24:46 PM

Neverplayedstandoff- I am an ex Heath player myself and occasional visitor to watch the games but was just saying info came from a fellow Ex Heath player.
No issues from me at all -Just trying to answer the question.
I will move on

Differ Lid · **Reply #20 on:** November 13, 2022, 08:19:30 PM

Just to help the Heath supporters on the forum who accused Driffield No.9 of hospitalising the Heath prop due to a high tackle he committed.

After watching the footage (just after the 70 minute mark) Heaths prop leads with a straight arm to the face of Driffield 4, collides heads with a Heath player due to flying into a tackle out of control and remains down on the floor. The entire time Driffield 9 is sat comfortably on the bench.

Not one for points scoring, but it was a rather wild accusation that needed clearing up based on fact. Particularly with the mental health issue these accusations could raise as Woody kindly highlighted

backrowbandit · **Reply #21 on:** November 13, 2022, 08:53:33 PM

Hmmmm....sounds like the Heath history changers have some explaining to do.

Woody · **Reply #22 on:** November 14, 2022, 01:38:29 PM

Quote from: Differ Lid on November 13, 2022, 08:19:30 PM

Just to help the Heath supporters on the forum who accused Driffield No.9 of hospitalising the Heath prop due to a high tackle he committed.

After watching the footage (just after the 70 minute mark) Heaths prop leads with a straight arm to the face of Driffield 4, collides heads with a Heath player due to flying into a tackle out of control and remains down on the floor. The entire time Driffield 9 is sat comfortably on the bench.

Not one for points scoring, but it was a rather wild accusation that needed clearing up based on fact. Particularly with the mental health issue these accusations could raise as Woody kindly highlighted

I think you are confused my good good friend. The number 9 made “wild” no arms tackle on the same prop who was in the air only minutes before resulting in injury and a penalty. The same 9 who had already received a yellow card earlier in the game. The referee decided it was only a penalty, however it was a clear carding offence. Very lucky not to get a red due to the previous yellow.

Not one for scoring points on this forum either, we did enough on Saturday.

Differ Lid · **Reply #23 on:** November 14, 2022, 01:59:59 PM

A different incident, in which the Heath prop was holding his hip and no contact with his head. Which you will see I highlighted in my earlier response. Lucky to not get a second yellow at the time agreed, but watching the footage the referee is correct as Driffield 9 never takes his eyes off the ball, and collides with the Heath prop in the air whilst going for an intercept.

One sided views of incidents I suppose. The camera footage must look different when viewed on a Halifax PC.

It was a cracking game of rugby, with neither side giving an inch. Which always results in controversial moments. If watching the game as a neutral you certainly would have got your moneys worth.

Round 10

Author Topic: Round 10 (Read 3885 times)

Kellythorpe

Re: Round 10

neverplayedstandoff

Re: Round 10

backrowbandit

Re: Round 10

Differ Lid

Re: Round 10

Premier3

Re: Round 10

Differ Lid

Re: Round 10

backrowbandit

Re: Round 10

Woody

Re: Round 10

Differ Lid

Re: Round 10