Stopped us from playing our game. Boring or not. Great tactics by Leeds. We couldn't do anything in the first half. Second half we were much improved but still found ourselves starting our sets too deep. Leeds should have won by more though, they had so many sets in our half but couldn't score. Just glad we made a game of it for 70 minutes and I saw Cas at Wembley.

Played to the rules and controlled the game. Stifled Castlefords attack and game. It's a pity when teams then potentially have more space to work with, make so little of it.

If you wanted to avoid this how would you change the rules. NRL already use a zero tackle if kicked dead in goal to try and encourage more thoughtful play.

Don't blame Leeds for employing boring tactics, blame Cas for not being able to counter them!
I was rooting for Cas at the beginning but really pleased Leeds won I the end.

I believe Sir Kev is gathering up all the winners medals and is going to ship them back to the RFL along with the trophy and a written apology to RL fans everywhere, and you personally, for not throwing the ball about recklessly. The homecoming is off too.




I'm sure Bulls team that held a 14 point lead over Saints with 20 minutes to go is still lauded for it's fluent rugby despite losing. IIRC weren't Saints tactics that day just to put kicks to a full-back who's 'arris had fallen out? May have been the year after. That's the thing - no one remembers! I do remember who won it though. Also there was no chance of it being as dull as last years Final. You should have gone BM. A great day out and both sets of fans were a credit to the game. Had a good booze up and sing-song with Leeds and Cas fans.

What a glorious Sunday morning!

So a Bulls fan moans about Leeds 'winning tactics



Couldn't make it up could you?!

They'll be moaning about the boring way we make a profit each year too.

Very true

Or how our defence stayed quite tight through the game and how our drives won cruical yards

You know the important things that win important games

There was a set of bulls fans sat in front of me supporting cas and they were visibly frustrated and irritated with leeds tactics, you could see them gesticulating more and more with every grubber kick into touch because it was preventing cas build up any tempo and momentum in attack.

Lawrie I haven't said anywhere in my post it was boring, as I've said about 3 times now, when it was posted, there were 6 points in the game with 30mins left. My point was Leeds should have been out have sight with all the possession they had.

Congratulations on the win.

At the end of the day, knockout rugby is about winning. As long as it's not illegal, any tactic is fair game, so well done Leeds

I never said you did call it 'boring'

I'm with Bull Mania on this. I thought this during the game. Anything could of changed that game for Castleford to get a roll on. I understood the first couple of kicks into touch to get a feel of the game but Cas were there for the taking and Leeds still played the stop start tactic keeping Cas in the game for longer than they should of been.

However, IF they had been told to play attacking rugby.. and it hadn't of come off, they'd have been accused of not respecting there opponent.

Basically leeds can't win.. Because there Leeds.

Game as a whole. I'd rather of seen Leeds play the class stuff they can and I would of loved to of seen Cas' nerves not control them but it wasn't to be.

Well done Leeds for winning and well done Cas for getting there. The experience will surely help them come playoffs.

But it didn't, rendering your whole post null and void.

Leeds controlled them by playing the very tactics you are saying they shouldn't have played. Nothing to do with Cas nerves.

Why are people moaning about last years final? Hull were decent in defence but were totally lacking in attack. It was played in a downpour which stiffled the game. Wigan crossed the line a couple of times and Hull didn't.

It wasn't a classic but with that scenario it was never going to be a classic.

Yesterday Leeds did what they had to do to secure victory. It may not have been entertaining for the neutral but in a final teams are more concerned about winning the trophy than entertaining the masses.

How is my "whole" post null and void?
Please explain?
The tactics kept Cas in the game for longer than they could of been IN MY OPINION. I'm not saying that it wasn't a winning tactic. They won the game.. How could I suggest otherwise? The nerves were clearly there to see IN MY OPINION. Leeds are a team that can apply attacking pressure and I believe (not certain because it never happened) that they COULD of finished out that game quicker than they did.
Is that hard to understand or are you going to "null and void" the whole post because you don't share the opinion.

At the World Cup semi last year I was sat next to two blokes from Watford. The cup final was their first game and they loved it, so much so that they booked tickets for the semi final which they were totally engrossed in, despite not knowing all of the rules etc.

Yet after last years final people were in meltdown on here saying it had done all sorts of damage. We need to stop being so over sensitive and realise that we actually do have a pretty good product, we just need start banging the drum more instead of being our own worst enemy.

Every cup final we seem to have Dave Woods constantly telling us that the game is by no means a classic. Then look at origin for example, game two this year was unrecognisable in terms of RL. Yet because Ray Warren and the propaganda machine kept saying how amazing it was, most were taken in by it.

Rain or not the completion rates were shocking, even from wigan, but hulls was something else. Even in october playoff games and grand finals it has chucked it down and both teams have kept hold of the ball. The weather is no excuse, it seemed like hull barely completed a set. Add to that there was only 2 tries in the game with 1 coming in the last minute when celebrations were already starting. It was just an awful, awful game with 2 poor teams but one team reaching all new levels of sucking.

It was a decent game, and Ryan Hall made it worth watching on his own. But Leeds took a huge gamble with their negative tactics, if Cas had been a bit more patient and organised they could have outscored Leeds easy.

Sinfield nailed the game plan, apart from one poor kick his kicking was outstanding and won them the game along with Hall's freakish finishing.

I don't really want to see teams play like that, but if you have Sinfield in your team and you can't win the CCup final to save your lives normally you may as well give it a go.

See I just don't get where the gamble was in Leeds tactics or why they're described as negative.
You kick to put yourself in the best position you can after your set of tackles. Most teams in most games have gone with the tactic of keeping the ball in play and trying to get a good kick chase to keep the opposition pinned down field.

If your opposition has some excellent kick returners and also is a team that pressures kickers very well, as Cas did to Leeds in the game at Headingley, and they're a team that likes to build momentum and play with speed, then why on gods green earth would you play into their hands?

Putting the ball in touch and then pressuring Cas in their own 20m area with fast, tough defence is no more negative than a kick that splits the full back and winger and a fast kick chase.

Leeds tactics were no more negative than anyother teams in any other game. They were just different and worked.

Your whole post is based on an opinion that Cas MIGHT have done X, Y, Z so Leeds should have put the game to bed sooner. The gameplan was not to let Cas do X, Y or Z and it worked to perfection. Thus rendering any other possible outcomes irrelevant.

You are welcome to your opinion. I'm off to watch my team show off the trophy.

Giving the ball to the opposition deliberately at the end of nearly every set is negative, as in the opposite of positive, which would have been to promote the football to create a try scoring position through an attacking kick... a kick to the corner to the winger, a high bomb, keeping it alive and moving it wide.

Most teams at least mix these up a bit, Leeds kicked to touch nearly every set. That is hugely negative in my book and limited the amount of tries they were going to score. If Hall hadn't scored 2 tries he had no right to score it could have been a very different game.

It's a good tactic when it works, but it's negative and on another day it wouldn't work.

You could say this about any tactic. You play what is in front of you and you do what you need to do to win. Those kicks ruined Cas, they never got out of their own half. A masterclass from Leeds. Interesting that opposition fans are the only ones criticising.

The kicks didn't ruin Cas, poor composure and structure in attack ruined Cas. Like I said I enjoyed the game and Leeds deserved to win, but it was fairly negative tactics and you can't rely on Hall to score tries like that every game.

Cas were never really in it. IMO of course. Yes, they got within six points for a while but during that time they were struggling to hammer away at the half way line, let alone the try line.

Leeds weren't far off scoring 2-3 more tries which would've made it as much as 41-10. If that's playing negative then i'll take it every week thanks.