Maybe it's the sun and the copious amounts of alchol, but todays result just seems to be a turning point for when leeds go on to challenge for top spots and Bradford just sink further down the table, and get smashed out of the challenge cup.

As soon as Nero no try it was over. Leeds have done it too us all too often over the past 4 or 5 years, especially at odsal. We can't score cause of lack of any attacking direction and they score from the bulls pov "soft" tries, usually from a break in own half.

Halley was awful, and sheriffe.

Though having said all thaty we were never gonna win without orford and kearney.... and langley.

Mor e drink needed.

While as minimal as it gets, Nero did look like he pushed...erm....the winger, forgot who it was for Leeds.

He made the most of the contact though, as the law states it was no try but its one of them "if the video ref wasn't there, it'd of been given" tries.

And Leeds' first was unbelievable. Even Stevo was going on about it and he struggled to remove his shiny bonce from Danny McLovePuppy's back end all game.

If Nero pushed anyone, what about Sheriffe being used as a tackle bag? He was positioned to take the ball and was barged into at full tilt.

The latitude given to Leeds' forward passing game was frightening, as was the disgraceful abolition of the play-the-ball - does a Leeds foot ever touch a ball?

The main reason we lost was the foul-ups by Reardon and Sheriffe, though. Giving up what are dead-cert, gift-wrapped tries is something you can't afford to do. And if you can't score from a break like Sykes, well, what can I say. And throwing away good possession and position, and then compounding it with dumb penalties is the stuff of nightmares.

Still, in many ways a heartening and certainly a spirited effort by the Bulls. Frustrating because of the errors, some major, but a lot of very good stuff in there too. Nobody's head went down, and the young lads showed up very well I thought and didn't look out of place.

Also - how long is it since we had a balmy summer evening with a top game and a shirt-sleeved crowd in big numbers like that? Seems like decades.

From my position it looked as though his hands brushed his shirt rather than a shove off the ball. It was great kick which beat the defender, not Nero's hands touching Donalds shirt. Why can our 'professional' referee's not interpret what has actually happened?
Also why is it acceptable to drag a player unless it happens close to the touch line in which case it then becomes a penalty?
Why can a player seemingly be tackled in the air if he is in his own in goal?
Well unfortunately the guy in charge is also incompetent and not much will change while he remains.

As I said earlier though I thought Leeds deserved the points today so fair play to them. I just hope we get a few calls our way next week.

I'm drawing a line in the sand!!!! You are a low life ****!

On it big time!

For having a different view to you about a rugby game. Grow up lad!

On the record I can do better thantbst ar$e wipe ewwen!!!!

The Nero no try was for all intence purposes was a try! Did he push him? No! Did he touch him? yes! Did he put himself in a position where that numb nuts of a ref could give a no try? Then yes he did! unlucky but also dumb by Nero. Should never have touched donald then it could have been judged on its merits! Nero changed that option by laying hands on( which is all he did in my opinion) donald milked it like any good pro should. And did it well!

No! For someone who I have bantered with for a few years. And developed a good repour with! I'm gutted, i feel let down. He has resorted to low life excuses when you were well beaten just as I predicted.

I don't think Lynch and Sheriffe's were bombed tries. Lynch was short of the line and Sheriffe's was a difficult pass to take.Reardon's was a bombed try.
IMO Nero's try should have been given as should McGuire's and Hall's.

We didnt help ourselves dropping the ball and not creating anything in attack but well beaten im not so sure.

Well we won by 3 scores and you didn't score in the second half!!

Well beaten? I think So!

I won't even mention the 2 clearn trys we had chalked off in the second half.

Down to one sub too in the second half when you had all four?

If that's not well beaten. I don't know what is?

Insults aside.....


Having watched it again, I agree with the above. I'd love for the refs to use common sense, but they went exactly by the rule book. Nero's fault really whether his hands would have made a difference or not is another matter.

Ignoring the pointless insults, it sounds like both sides could take something from the game, which is always good. The Bulls played hard and put in a good effort without Orford. Leeds muscled up in the second half with injuries.

I really do think that if the Bulls get the right coach for next year you will be very competitive.

You talk sense, you can come again!


I'll say it again, great effort by all 34 players on that pitch.

Matt Diskin's foot did - twice at the same play the ball.

I agree that it's disgraceful how even the most fundemental and basic skill (such as playing the ball correctly) is almost entirely ignored by the officials. Even James Child who until recently appeared to require a genuine looking attempt with the foot waited until the 60th minute to mention it at Knowsley Road. 59 minutes too late.

The ref was bad for both sides - fact.
Sheriffe was appalling - fact.
Reardon was, and has been all season, a waste of cap - fact.
We were well beaten by a team who did not have full use of their interchanges due to injury - fact.

Where is the gloating Andrew. I am just saying it as I see it.

That was a typical flat Macca performance IMO.

A few thoughts:

Clearly the sun got in Sheriffe's eyes with the bombs. So why the hell didn't we deliver some in the first half?

A lot of people thought Burrow's absence from the Leeds side was good for us. We underestimated the threat of Maguire though. How much does that lad love playing against us at Odsal? Always on the score sheet.

A fair effort from the boys though, not too disappointed. I wish we wouldn't resort to carping about the ref on this board, it smacks of desperation. The reality is we were beaten by the better side. Let's move on to the next challenge.

Put a few things right and I think you've got a great chance against wire next week.

On the positive side there was plenty of effort and we made plenty of opportunities despite being without our leading player for clean breaks and our main playmaker. Defensively we looked pretty solid too despite being without one of our best defenders.

Where we lost the game was that Leeds just had a bit more quality and took all the chances they were presented with. I thought Sinfield, McGuire and Eastwood were the difference between the two sides. Eastwood made a huge impact when he came on and Sinfield's kicking was spot on.

The downside for us was the lack of quality on the edges. We bombed two chances on the wing that should have been taken, Reardon's dropped ball being criminal. Defensively Sheriffe didn't do so well under the bombs but Sinfield had ages to put the kicks in, there was very little pressure applied to him. Add to that the difficulty in taking those kicks and you have to credit the kicker really. As for Halley's last ditch defence on McGuire I think I could've made a better attempt.

The second half saw our kicking game fall apart and we got very little quality ball. Leeds really turned the screw. In the forwards I thought we tired a bit in the heat and lacked someone like Eastwood to get the side on the front foot. I'm not sure what McNamara sees as Kopczak's role but for such a big lad he spends very little time on the field and makes very little impact. I'd say he needs to be much more aggressive and really get stuck in. If he's interchange prop he had to make an impact and he just doesn't do that at the moment.

For me our stand out players were L'Strange, Godwin and Whitehead. Platt was the best of the threequarters despite one howler.

Hopefully we'll have some or all of the three absentees back for next week. With them in the side we're a different proposition.

Some Leeds fans think we play better with McGuire & Sinfield at 6 & 7

I thought Bradford played ok, a bit more composure and it would have been a lot closer, my only worry for Bradford is your lack of speed.

Not too much to disagree with there Sam.

I was disappointed with the result, but not with the performance given the personnel missing.

I think the top 3 are going to be the current top three.
I then see a mini league between Hull, Leeds, us and Hudds for 4,5,6,7. We need to aim to finish as high in this mini league as possible.

As it stands now I'd predict Leeds, Us, Hull & Hudds.
All things considered, I'd say that would be a good season!

Not a bad summation there IMO, Sam.

I think Koppy's limitations demonstrate why we signed Scully, and why we are missing him? I think he'd be far more effective for impact off the bench. But we are where we are.

The limitations on the wings are plain for all to see when up against a side with teh quality of Leeds - although Rikki had been a big improver this year, and IIRC he only dropped one bomb which was straight out of the (dropping) sun? - but in fairness the Chairman fully acknowledged our weakness there at the Fans' Forum. The usual "financial constraints". The same reason that we have a small squad with limited strength in depth, which is why losing your two best and most key players as well as Langley and a key prop not yet played hits us harder than most other clubs. Some inconvenient truths regarding which the inhabitants of Planet Eddie are in denial.

Leeds were very good indeed in that second half despite their lack of interchange options, but we still managed to contain them to only two scores. The Maguire/Sinny combo looked pretty potent IMO, and that may have made a lot of the difference. I do think though that all those decisions going against us in the first half must have messed with our players' heads. And not for the first time this season either. It's all very well folk saying Silverdud and Halibut were bad for both sides (they were), but he was bad for US predominantly in the first. When the damage was done, IMO. Not for the first time.

Folk have played hell about Sykes being run down by a prop, but we used to see Fielden doing that - IIRC he ran down (or nearly did) Paul Sampson, supposed fastest guy in the game, on more than one occasion. Did wonder if Skyes might be carrying a bit of an injury, but with Kearney on the park we'd have been a different proposition in the speed stakes.

Anyway, the scoreboard records the result. We probably bombed the game through dropped chances, but the difference between the two teams was not really that great.

That's where Kearney's been coming into play for us.

Generally speaking I thought the final score reflected the difference between the sides in quality. However when compared with some floggings we've had I thought it wasn't a bad showing all things considered.

I prefer not to go into the whole ref/video ref discussion. We had our chances to win the game but blew them. The officials made some odd calls but the result of the game was always in our own hands.

As I said at the start of the season, finishing 5th would represent a very good season indeed considering our squad and the money situation. The side have shown they're capable of it too. I think 6th or 7th is more where we'll end up.