Was he on debut or playing in the pack? I think there is a difference between playing on the wing and mixing it with the big boys in the pack. But as I said, I don't think it is simply a case of age not every 17 is the same.

Does it matter if he was on debut or not, he's obviously made his debut as a 17 year old, perhaps younger, I'm not sure in the case of Cas.

Doesn't a winger run into forwards then in this day and age, I think you'll find most wingers carry the ball as most of the forwards if not more.

Are you seriously claiming that you can compare the role of a forward to a winger? How often do wingers tackle props in a RL game? A lot less than a 2nd rower/loose forward would.

But I think the coach is right to introduce youngster gradually and as and when the game dictates. That's my opinion and I do not subscribe to throw them in and let them sink or swim theory. He'll get plenty more opportunities to impress. That's all I have to say on the matter.

Made his debut of the bench when we played saints away, today was his second game and first start.

No Im not, I'm claiming that he has still got to mix it with the forwards none the less, and yes that includes props, second rowers and loose forwards, nowhere to hide in rugby league, not even for wingers.

The game dictated that we needed some fresh ideas and legs on the field after Deacon got walloped. Yeah, introduces young players gradually by all means, but at least give the lad a chance to get into the game, 1 run and 1 tackle will have benefited nobody, he tackles men every week at training, he could have gone on with 15 minutes to go and got his hands on the ball and and got stuck in defence and got a feel for the pace of the game, this would have benefitted the players development more than 4 poxy minutes and the team would have benefitted by having fresh legs and 1 injured player less to carry.

They are not children, they are strong young men capable of handling themselves.

Upto 3rd and looked strong today, how did you boys do again?

Anybody would think you were trying to prove something.

With regards to your chances of finishing in the top 8, in most other years you could probably have got away with your poor form and still got into the top 8 - and from there anything can happen in play off rugby (as 2005 proved!). The problem is, in past years you could pretty much rely on the top 2 or 3 teams winning virtually all games against teams in the bottom half of the table. This year, every week it seems there's at least one "unexpected" result, and this weekend we had Salford (13th) beating Saints (1st) and Catalans (at the time 11th) beating Hull K R (at the time 3rd). Results like this are making it harder and harder for Bradford to make the top 8.

Before this weekend I genuinely thought Bradford had a good chance of making it, especially after the way they'd played in patches against Leeds and Saints. However, losing to Cas, a match I had down as a definite win for you, could well be the killer blow. Now I'd say that every team from Warrington upwards is probably too far ahead of you, leaving 8th place the only realistic possibility. With Wigan & Cas 5 clear of you now, and Hull and Catalans 3 clear, even with a game in hand on 3 of those teams to pass all 4 of them is probably going to be a bridge too far. The prospect of both Wigan and yourselves both finishing below the top 8 is one I don't think anyone could have forseen in their widlest imaginations at the start of the year, and although I have a feeling Wigan might just squeeze in, does this season signify a permanent "changing of the guard"?

Toss a coin 27 times and you expect roughly 13-14 heads and 13-14 tails. But it wouldn't necessarily be HTHTHTHTHTHT etc...

The one hope remaining hinges on a patch/couple of patches of Ws over the last two months of the regular season. Could happen. Probably won't but still. We know the side are capable of decent performances, though not half the time as yet. But then heads or tails could be well ahead by round 18, yet back around level by r27.

What odds are being offered on Bulls making it/missing out?

I suspect that at least one side that has been well placed for most of the year will drop out off the play-offs completely. Maybe Quins, maybe Wakey, maybe even Rovers.

And?

Tossing a coin is down to luck and nothing to do with ability.

TBF this season the decent performances have been outnumbered by the poor ones and we've never seriously looked like changing that. That's the frustrating thing, time and again we make the same mistakes and show no signs of learning or improving. Every so often we pull a good performance out of the bag but then spoil it by putting in 2 or three bad ones. The pattern of the season can be seen in the space of 80min where good play is confounded by periods where the team switch off or make laughable errors.

We have a core of good professionals who are capable of better than this and who have performed consistently in the past. Trouble is we also have several players who are sub standard but nobody putting any pressure on them to perform. Meanwhile the coach seems unable to stop the rot.

I think it's time for me to predict that if we make the playoffs I'll go to the first game painted red, amber and black, change my name by deed poll to Steve McNamara, and flaunt my naked self on top of the Coral Stand to the tune of Woolly Bully.

[size=42If that doesn't get the team performing nothing will[/size

No, but if you had the ability to win half your games, you wouldn't necessarily go WLWLWLWLW all year.

Obviously.

But if you only have the ability to win half of your games you need to be taking advantage of the "easier" games at home in order to help you on the way to reaching your goal.

Two wins at home all season and losses to such quality as Castleford and the Celtic Crusaders at Odsal will hardly help.

In order to win half of our games we need to turn a 6.1.11 current record into a 13.1.13 record. Not gonna happen.

True, and thatmay well happen. I just don't think any of the top 7 can now be caught by Bradford, although one of them could well be replaced by one of the teams currently 9th - 11th.

But the wins at Wire and Saints and at home to Leeds go in the other column.

If by not gonna happen you mean unlikely to happen I'd agree. But I think there's still a slim chance, for the reasons outlined. To provide further evidence, Cas and Hull KR could each end up with around 50/50 records as a result of a good run coupled with form not dissimilar to ours in their other games. If the run can happen in games 1-9 or 9-18, why not 18-27?

Like I said, unlikely but possible. Which is why I'd be interested in seeing odds.

He doesn't have the players around him to carry him. He needs time & space, he gets neither now. His shortcomings are now brutally exposed. You can console yourselves that he is the greatest scrum half of the 20th century.

I remember a time many years ago, when Leeds Utd, having won the last ever Division One title the year before, were garbage the year after and almost got relegated. However, despite being useless pretty much every week, towards the end of the season they played their socks off against Man Utd and almost beat them. Alex Ferguson blasted the Leeds players afterwards saying their performance was an insult to their boss as it showed how well they could play when they wanted to, whereas their performances over the rest of the season could get Howard Wilkinson the sack. One wonders if the same may be applicable here - I'm not absolving Macnamara from any blame, don't get me wrong, however in both games against Saints and Leeds the Bulls players have showed what they are capable of - too many times against other teams this year they have gone missing. Brings into question what percentage of the blame lies with the coach and what percentage lies with the players.

Not sure. We showed in the laft 15 mins of the first half yesterday what we are capable of. It's just they then imploded in the second half. OK Cas got a lucky break with the first of the three tries as it should have been a penalty. But they had no excuse for the second and third of that period.

Too inconsistent this season even within the same game never mind a number of games.

Now I know I said give the youngsters longer than 4 mins but even I think 6 years is too young

You're currently 12th.

I'd say it was pretty insightful.

HAHAHAHAHA

I said it was intelligent.

My apologies.

I got the impression you were ebing sarcastic.

It's as inspiring as a Paul Medley speech.

I know there's a misprint but did you mean: being sarcastic, effing sarcastic, either or both.