The forward pass to Hall in the first half.

Irrelevant how JJB went down, that appeared a clear cut obstruction by Newton.

That apart I think the other calls (that went against Leeds) were correct.

On the Leeds performance:

Penalty count was 12 - 6 in Bradford's favour and probably rightly so.

If people really want to know why Leeds lost (rather than just blame the officials) it's quite straight forward, they are playing really poorly and have been pretty much all this season.

First half: 5 penalties, 5 knock ons, 1 forward pass
Second half: 7 penalties, 5 knock ons.

Considering the basic one out football with not even attempting an offload it's simply not good enough.

At least we shouldn't be hearing the 'look at the table' after tonight from those too blind or stupid to recognise the p[iis[/is poor football Leeds are serving up at the present time.

Halley was quality for Bulls and Jeffries' kicking game put Rhinos' to shame.

If Sykes could kick at goal it wouldn't have been anywhere near as close.

On the tries, they are decisions that you see given either way, tonight they went against Rhinos, another day they'll go in favour of Rhinos.

It's better to be playing poorly at this stage of the season than it is towards the business end.

Too much moaning and kneejerking on here by some posters IMO.

How dare you come on here with your common sence and what not.

Go to bed.

It must be the disease.

I've read someone say on here tonight that we'd have won the game had it not been on Sky. Cast your minds back to the game at Craven Park earlier in the season and the opposite probably would have applied regarding the disallowed Hull KR try.

We were cr*p!!
Simple's.
HH tries like burrow scored are given every week so for me it highlight's something else what the officials get wrong all the time but that doesn't excuse how cr*p we were!

Such as?

If there are ones scored every week it shouldn't be difficult to highlight some of the recent ones.

You watch the live match's every week and you'll see how many are given.
Just look at kallum watkin's V Hkr!!


HE is clearly in front of bailey when he makes the break but receive's the pass to score.

And where was Watkins at the play the ball?

Anymore or are they all gonna be like that example?

Watkins was onside stood yards behind Bailey. He goes past him as Bailey bumps off the defender and then waits for Bailey to overtake him to receive the pass.

So basically a perfectly legit try totally unlike Burrow's last night.

He was still in front of the player that made the initial break was he not???
Imo it's the same scenario and it will be interesting to see if similar tries are chalked off throughout the year.
Don't get me wrong we deserved to lose but that was a surprising call imo.

Yes as I've just described and there is absolutely nothing wrong in that scenario. It was in no reasonable way comparable with the Webb/Burrow incident.



No it isn't the same, not even remotely. One was legitimate while the other was not.

It won't be interesting at all. I thought you'd have more than this to back up your claim 'that tries like this are given every week' and yet you don't seem to be able to refer to any except for one occasion that was in no way comparable.

Just out of interest have you never seen a try given the same as tonight??
Without being able to be specific(which doesn't help i know) i'm sure i've seen those given on numerous occasion's and will be watching closely to see how many are allowed this year.
P.s I'm sure other poster's have seen similar tries given and imo when the attacking player goes past the (other player coming back) he plays him onside similar to a kick chase.
If this is not the case i stand corrected but having watched/played the game for over 20yr's i can't recall a situation when a try has been chalked off in similar circumstance's.

I'm sure I will have (I've seen some terrible mistakes) but seeing as I can't recall any specifically I'm not prepared to go out on a limb by claiming I see them every week. As for other posters (without specific examples) they're comments are equally worthless.

Webb was stood in the defensive line, he was as far offside as any attacking player reasonably could be.

This decision was 100% correct and even if on other forgotten occasions tries have been allowed to stand it doesn't alter the fact that Burrow's was correctly ruled out.

Breaks are hard enough to come by these days so what are the chances of one occurring at the precise rare moment that an attacking player is still stood in the defensive line, where that player immediately joins the attacking move and involves himself in a try? That's a lot of ducks needed to line up for that to occur. We probably won't see another one all season but be sure to let me know when it happens.

Bollox. JJB would never have got anywhere near Jeffreys.

I was surprised the try was given, even so. But no more than your try which was miles forward. maybe we all need to accept that shìt happens, and that the Champions should not be losing against a complete shìt team like Bradford?

Is that relevant when a Bradford player blocked a defender ahead of the ball carrier or are we playing grid iron these days?

Not really, cos as I said i thought would have been a penalty. I was responding to Tad implying that JJB would have got to him. I can't see he would have.

Fair enough as long as we both agree we're watching rugby league and Bradford's winning score came from an illegal play that somehow was overlooked by the video referee.

For me,
You can always find an excuse for not giving a try on a video replay. Watch any move for long enough and you'll find something not quite right.

But, how many times has a ref called for a ruling on a knock on when the ball hasn't gone to ground?
There was an agenda for Leeds to lose tonight. The super league want competition and this is how they get it. Joke decisions and Bradford climbing the table.

I love the smell of sour grapes in the morning...

The name 'True Southstander' is, I fear, quite accurate given your blinkeredness



Anyhoo - there were some contentious decisions, I thought the refereeing was good. Whether or not a knock on like the one called against Leeds tonight would normally be given, it was clearly knocked forward of the line parallel with the try lines. Likewise, Webb was offside. Obviously I'm going to be happier than your average Leeds fan, but this talk of a conspiracy against Leeds is a good giggle and makes Leeds fans look a little silly

I can't imagine how you got the taste out of your mouth after the last couple of years.

Enjoy.

does that not make it a foul then?

never implied that whatsoever adey. i said he was illegally blocked, which he was

We are probably not miles apart - although it was not Bradfords's actual play that was illegal, but the well-off-the-ball incident that may well have been. Amounts to same in the end though. And as I suspect we may not be on the question of Leeds' try coming off a very forward pass.

As I've said elsewhere: it happens. We each have to live with it.

OK - apologies for misinterpreting what you said.