Not really, on the replay it looked what it was, about 2 metres forward. But that linesman was a waste of space. He was the one who failed to notice Bridge's elbow.

Could somebody also explain to me how Sammut was adjudged to have been offside from the chargedown, thus leading to a disallowed try, whilst Atkins was allowed to play on in the exact same position leading to a legal try?

warrington should have had 2 trys not aloud and thats generous. thought riley, atkins try shouldnt be aloud as well as waterhouses. we should have had 1 try aloud definetely and maybe platts.

Tremendous game. Full credit to the team, played brilliantly tonight and the final score flatters Warrington. We got the tough end of a lot of calls again, but didn't let heads drop. We didn't rise to Warrington's niggle either, just kept our heads, and kept playing right to the end. It was heartening to see us not wnating to concede with just minutes to go.

Well done Bradford, lets build from this.

Wrong colour shirt.

Fantastic effort from 1-17 but we just lacked that killer edge. We played with a lot of pride and desire and we looked like we believed we could win. Fair enough we didn't get the rub of the green but the difference was when Warrington got the ball in our 20 they finished it off with a score. We bombed a couple of decent opportunities in the final third of the pitch but hopefully we'll learn from it.

We didn't implode in the final 20 minutes which was a key for me. If we perform like that week in week out we'll make the 8.

Sammut was in front of the bulls player who charged down the Wire kick (I think it was Hargreaves)
Atkins was BEHIND the Wire player that deflected Sammut's grubber kick.

That is the difference.

And for whoever mentioned it, there was nothing wrong with Waterhouse's try.

Both of the first half tries would have been given in the game hadn't have been on TV (and therefore no video ref)

And if Alibert couldn't give the Crookes try without going upstairs then he shouldn't be a ref at all.

Watch again. Atkins was behind the Warrington player who the ball hit thus was onside.
Don't say Riley obstructed because that's a weak argument.

No idea what your issues.are with Waterhouse's try. Stonewaller.

I don't think there can really be any issues with any VR calls to be fair.

Way too many errors and penalties given but the boys did well, let's build on this and make it a win next week against hull kr. We silenced a lot of critics tonight and we showed we have real potential

Great effort from the side tonight, never gave up. If we play with that commitment every week we'll be alright, especially when Gale, Elima and Purtell are back.

We were a bit unlucky at times and Wire were the better side but we really made them work for the win and weren't a million miles from winning ourselves and not many of us gave us much of a chance beforehand.

Didn't have a problem with the VR decisions but the pass to Riley was forward. Bridge was lucky to stay on the field. I noticed he hid on the wing for the rest of the game after his forearm smash.

Super efforts in particular by Langley and Diskin. Thought Manoakafoa looked promising and Lulia got better too.

We looked a bit lost for ideas on their line a few times which was a shame as we worked very hard. However with Gale back we should be better organised.

Plenty to build on.

thought that 3 trys for wire should have been not aloud. poor ref from what i could see at match. some nasty tackle from wire, at least a yellow card should have been issued. Thought manuakafoa played well like everyone else. we were very unluck not to win. Against wigan we were outclassed but against wire we werent.

also how on earth did the fer not see wire offside all the time!!

Thought Langley was otstanding tonight, let the forwards brilliantly.

Langleys a great player. Also think young Bateman is a find too and Burgess is a monster.

Thought Chris hill was our best forward in a tough game.

Strong effort n defence. with the ball we need more runners n options 4 hb's. were predictable atm

Defensively we looked pretty good, just lacking a little in the creativity department though. Langley was massive in defence, but I really wish he'd learn to keep the ball moving when we're trying to get it out wide, he can be really infuriating at times.

Massive respect to both JB and Burgess for backing up their performances in the under 20s on Thursday, and Bateman showed what he can do with the ball for a lovely cut out pass for Crookes' try.

Lulia looks like he'll be quite dangerous on a firm pitch with a bit of space, his trademark fend was out in full force tonight and he kept Bridge quiet.

Manase also impressed on debut, drove it in hard and was always looking to slip the offload away. A bit more game time and he should be a useful player.
Not quite sure about Joseph though, he looked out of his depth tonight and I'm not sure he's good enough for SL.

Where was Scruton tonight?

We wernt lost for ideas at all. If you watch the game back you will notice Jefferies, slowing us down and hitting the front man every single time! If you look Kearney and sammut were running superb lines, but Jefferies just plain ignored them! They were times we could of had a chance to put points on but he just chose the wrong pass TIME AFTER TIME! I'm mot bring negative but Wire were there for the taking

His missus gave birth last night so was given the night off.

Best performance from our lads for a long time. We were the better team IMHO for most of the match. The only times we were not were when it probably mattered the most - letting them through for a couple of relatively easy tries (but our defence was generally very very good all night otherwise) and, especially, not having something special to get the points when close to their line.

I was apoplectic about Bridge's forearm smash at Ben. Could not understand why it was not a straight red. Don't forget, I am still very very bitter about Bradley being red-carded for something allegedly similar in his last game in 1998 when it transpired he had no case to answer, so you will never get an objective opinion from me on an action like Bridge's! I have read that the attack was to the chest not the neck, as it appeared to be at the game watching the screen half a mile away. If it was, maybe - just maybe - that saved him. But if it was a brain fart (does Bridge possess a brain, after some of his previous off-field antics...?) then I just wish some of our own players' brain farts in recent times would have been so leniently dealt with.

Wire's first try was surely off the mother of all forward passes? Even Leeds might have struggled to get away with that one. The rest of their tries seemed OK. My only issue was why Hallibut did not go to the screen for the possibility of a double-movement (it wasn't - he kept his arm off the ground and scored a good try as a result) when he did for our no-tries, and we had one chalked off because of a foot in touch a single frame (how many naonoseconds is that?) before the ball was grounded. I suspect we would have had two tries awarded had the game not been on TV.

I could not understand why we had Samut' try disallowed, although I have read an explanation elsewhere that I suspect is the truth of it.

I did not think Hallibyut had a lot of help from at least on e of his TJ's tonight. On 60 mins I thought he was having a reasonable game, although I think his failure to penalise some actions could have led to a brawl before the end. Credit to the players on both sides for avoiding that - that last quarter was intense and could have gone badly wrong.

Langley was very very good tonight I thought, and Diskin showed more of the form that he showed in his past life at Leeds. Can't fault the effort all round though, just that little bit lacking still in the execution near the line. But we made good yards and really stuck it up the Wire, and they didn't like it. Got rattled and made mistakes, even allowing for the temporary loss of Briers.

Presume Tom came in for Scrutes, who I presume was given understandable leave of absence at short order tonight. Well done for backing up like that.

If offered a loss by 13 and not a lot between the sides before the match, with our injury list I suspect most of us would have taken it. Well-deserved standing ovation at the end. I expected another pummeling. Instead, I saw a hell of a lot of grounds for renewed hope. An excellent defensive effort. A team that played the full 80 and still had some gas in the tank at the end. And an all-round effort second to none. I'd have much preferred a win unlooked-for, and maybe Gale and Ollie and Purtell would have made the difference near the line, but losing like that is going to make a few more around the game revisit their "written-off" assessments.

Well done lads.

Grounding it short followed by double movement to get it over line. Was at least worth referring to VR.

Agree 100% on second point. He did not refer that yet he referred ours.

At the match, on the big screen about half a light year away, it did seem clear that neither the ball nor the ball-carrying arm hit the deck. But one to double check on the replay I think, in due course since I never set Sky+ cos of expecting the worse...

No issues with Waterhouse's try at all for me. The eagle-eyed touchie probably saw it was a try from where he was and told the ref. I mean he didn't miss a thing all match...