Kear says we were "old manned"--that's not good enough when you are chasing certain promotion as opposed to an end of season bun fight.It really boils down to the same thing,even when we have been winning,NO ORGANISATION in the middle and no,or very little, BIFF up front.Look what's happened to Salford when they have added a bit of quality in the middle through the signing of hastings,different team.I think Lilley has the quality but we need direction and we are still not winning the battle up front,unless you do that combined with the ability to control things when in possession,then you are gonna struggle.It's gonna be hard from here,but we have the players to beat Workington next time if they are properly LED.Just my opinion.

Assuming we meet Workington again in the final playoff game, how many other pro games would be on that weekend? What I'm getting at, is if there are only a couple of other games on, would the RFL appoint one of their SL refs to our game?

I wouldn't count on it. They might give them all the day off. As I'm sure you agree we need to be able to win regardless of the ref.

You know that by putting "FACT", that negates you saying it's just your opinion?

Incidentally Super League hasn't had a successfull Bulls team in quite some time now. Does it still exist?
Would Super League have better attendances and clubs be making a bit more money if the Bulls were in it? Probably. But the idea that it "NEEDS" the Bulls is utterly ludicrous. Much like last year when people were saying the Championship NEEDED Bradford and they couldn't be relegated. It's still there.

Scott Mikalauskas was the referee for last year's League 1 Playoff Final, if that helps give an idea.

I believe the Million Pound Game and the Super League Playoff Semi Finals would be the same weekend.

I've just about got over the game now so will offer my two pennorth.

There were loads of reasons why we lost. In no particular order I reckon the main ones were:

* A worrying lack of speed and movement or fluidity in attack. I like the idea of beating up the opposition with drives but they need to think the ball may be passed or it is easy to defend. We didn't pass i out enough, and seemed worryingly static an pedestrian with way too few runners and options. Easy to defend.

* Panic and an inability to execute. Prime examples were the holding down, yes it was a clear sinbin but how did we not score? Worse, the 3 man overlap when we again panicked and unforgivably screwed it up with a forward pass, when we were queuing up to walk the ball in.

* In the face of incompetent officials, having nobody on the field who could take a lead and overcome Worky's grubby tactics and endless aggravation and laying on. It was by a distance the most stop-start, ty spectacle with disruption every 30 seconds, and we were (as Kear observed) definitely "old manned".

I don't understand trying to use 3 halfbacks. Keyes has been good all year so what message does it send to any of them if they are spelled like forwards? Pick your halfbacks and they know they have 80 minutes. It didn't work.

The most disappointing thing for me was the overall impression of speed and agility. Despite having a very young side, Workington just always looked the more lively, and seemed to make great inroads and disrupt our defence far more than we theirs. I hoped we'd come out in the second half and start to play, but in fact, Workington remained on top.

And yes, had we not blown it, we could easily have won, and certainly we didn't get much rub either, but to me overall Worky, who have the double over us, just out-enthused us and showed more ability to think and create. I'm not here to slag Worky - like Kear I don't give a toss, I'm talking about the Bulls, but its not the result, is more that we didn't play like we should be playing at this stage, at home, in a key game, and we were unable to cope with a game plan that was reasonably predictable.