Bradford returned to winning ways with a hard-fought victory over Castleford at Odsal. The 38-12 scoreline perhaps flattered Bradford somewhat, and did not fairly reflect the closeness of the game up until the 66th minute when Castleford’s hard work imploded through ill-discipline. READ MORE ON THIS STORY....

Bradford returned to winning ways with a hard-fought victory over Castleford at Odsal. The 38-12 scoreline perhaps flattered Bradford somewhat, and did not fairly reflect the closeness of the game up until the 66th minute when Castleford’s hard work imploded through ill-discipline. READ MORE ON THIS STORY....

Yes should have been 38 - 6, Carney's forward pass should have been ruled out,thanks

Scruton should have been sent off in the 3rd minute too, stuff happens.

But I don't suppose we will get the mass hysteria/faux player safety trolls around this week will we..for example, Bren?

Someone needs to get a screenshot of the last Sky replay, paused at the point of contact.
We still didn't play well enough to win though.

Posted on the other forum, originally from Twitter I believe:

Theres a great picture on twitter and casforum right at the inpact.
Looks bad, lets not forget obrien didnt have the ball at this time.

Its on a cas player so it doesnt count.

I think the Bulls were the better side,they won the battle up front and gave the likes of Diskin & L'strange far too much room to work.

Not sure how the officials missed the Scruton tackle at the time, then i knew why when they missed the Carney forward pass. If the RFL are to be consistent they have to look at the Scruton hit,or it will be open season on playmakers by opposition players with late tackles

You must be desperate to hold that incident as reason you lost. 7 tries to 2 (one obviously forward). You had a chance to take control of the game when you had the numerical advantage but your forwards didn't muscle up. The game was lost in forwards, shame the ginger midget couldn't acknowledge that in his post match interview. I suppose it still reinforces the victim mentality amongst you.

Nice to see you come on when we lose.

Trolls. Bore off somewhere else.

Nothing in it other than marginally late, possibly should have been a penalty at the time. The video ref reviewed the incident whilst the player was down and decided it was a fair challenge, I agree with him.

You obviously missed the 1st bit of my post.

So, looking at this image and as a direct question you seem not to want to answer, which part of O'Brien's body do you see in contact with Scruton's shoulder?

It was not the reason we lost the game, Bradford's speed playing the ball kept us on the back foot throughout and caused our indiscipline. I am also disappointed in Millward's post-match comments, for the first time this year we didn't show any kind of backbone once things got tough.
However, we have lost our best player for two games (which I agree with, no victim mentality here) and just expect some consistency when the same thing happens the following week.

Contact was shoulder to should and the force of impact sent O'Brien's head into the shoulder but contact was minimal. Not a lot in it except being slightly late but even that was 50/50 at normal speed. I know you're all feeling hard done by that your one man team was banned this week but the incidents aren't comparable in my opinion.

But as we have found contact with the head (even if it is not the initial impact or intentional) is a disciplinary offence.

Can we now talk about the Gilmour head butt on 49 mins now then... I assume you'll be happy to accept a match ban for unintentional contact?

We are having this discussion on your forum, I think it's a head clash BUT in fairness, it is technically contact with the head of the player with the ball, and it should be no different to accidental contact with the shoulder or arm.

If that's shoulder to shoulder, I'll be the new Pope.

O'Brien's arm is clearly underneath that of Scruton's.

It's a shoulder to the cheek. Given Rangi's was not as bad, it should be at least a 3 game ban.

Remember Rangi had previous though for a very similar offence, which will have increased his ban.
However, the incident is worse IMO as O'Brien does not have the ball.
2 match ban for me, maybe 1 with an early guilty plea if he has the option.

it seems the some Bulls fans must have some sort of body deformity's, or maybe cross eyed, they see a picture of a Bulls player hitting a player with a late high shoulder charge, but they think its shoulder to shoulder, when you wake up tomorrow and your not so exited take another look, when a player gets killed by a mis timed shoulder charge, his team can do what the Catalan club have done & say well we didn't think it was that bad plus our doctors tried to help.

The game was close until Mr Ganson intervened, i dont give a toss about loosing i do give a toss about the welfare of the players, when the officials turn a blind eye or mis these incidents it make the whole competition look amateurish

Why has the photo been removed is it too damaging for Mr Silverwoods rep

Is it allowed to discus the game itself? And to comment that the score flattered us, and we came close several times to blowing it when it was in the balance? We were the better side...not by a country mile though, and I suspect had Chase been playing and given our own weakness in the halves, we would quite likely have been looking at a rather different result.

The initial contact was clearly with the shoulder of O'Brien, was a fair challenge and Scruton shouldn't get any ban or fine for it.

I actually thought you were signifantly better, the play-the-ball was much faster and caused us problems all game. I think it is down to this that the Cas players lost their discipline, they could not cope with the speed of Bradford in posession.
Chase would have made a difference but he deserved not to be playing.

Interesting, I didn't think any tackle on a player without the ball was fair, regardless of where the contact was?