bump

Thank you very much. I would agree with the majority of that.



The only thing I will say is that the stuff I personally felt he got wrong most, was the amount of laying on, which even someone with poor vision could see.



Normally, I would completely agree with your comments, and I have numerous times defended referees for spotting things that most other people don't see, then on the replay you realise the referee was right. I've tried refereeing very very amateur games and it's bloody hard even at that low level. I wouldn't wish it on anyone.



I think what gets frustrating isn't that they miss the subtle knock-ons or who hit the ball first in a big ricochet, as you can excuse things like that. You'd need some sort of slow-motion vision to get it right. What frustrates is when they continually let a team lay on in the tackle and don't do nearly enough about it. Hence my call of him having a 'mare.



And incidentally, regarding the poor standard of refereeing in general, I personally believe the linesmen should take far more blame than the man in the middle. They don't do nearly enough and yet get hardly any of the flack. The referee would have a better job getting everything right if the other blokes actually helped him.



Glad to see the sensible opinions are starting to come about though rather than us all just abusing each other.



Now, how about a hug?

Well, giving him the benefit of the doubt lets accept that is what he meant. He was, however, being very disingenuous to the clubs he named, two of which were playoff teams, unlike Bradford.



However, he wasn't talking about the "toughness" of opposition when he tried to clarify his muddled point by saying none of them were "big teams" and then going on to name five teams who he thinks would have made worthy opposition for us, yet three of them, Bulls included, did not make the playoffs last year.



Celtic were tough opposition last night, it was 6 all until the 65th minute, Salford beat us last year and we recorded last second victories against Wakefield and Castleford. I would hope our players and I am sure you would hope yours, aren't so complacent about the abilities of teams like our first four opponents, all of whom remember, and this is pertinent, beat you last year and two of whom made the playoffs.



He is the one poster on this thread that is being petty and bitter and making paranoid accustions that do not bear scrutiny.



I would not assume playing the Bulls is an easy 2 points. It never is. Those kind of crass unfounded and arrogant comments are not something I would make, they are the realm of Ewenfork.

I couldn't really care to be honest.



I rarely, if ever, rail about the failings of our referees. They generally do a pretty decent job but, of course, there is always room for error. Just as there is room for error from players, coaches and, it would seem, massive room for error from spectators who have little understanding of the game and let an obsession with referees detract from their enjoyment of it.



Last season Leeds spent much of the season being caned week after week after week in the penalty count (the facts hardly support any hinted at bias towards us from the officials). So much so that Mclennan actually stated in an interview it was his goal to address this and win a penalty count in the next game. We didn;t.



My ire at the time and, I have to say, the ire from most on Sousthander, a bunch I don't hold in particularly high regard, was directed towards the indiscipline of our players and our coaches inability to address it and not at the referees.

Did you not read my post?





I said not based on last years position, I mean the big clubs who tend to bring bigger crowds.



So you would say that any club outside of those I mentioned (bar Leeds obviously) is bigger than even one I mentioned?

Swing and a miss! I'd say where a team finishes in the league is more of an indicator of their playing ability rather than the number of supporters they can muster. We beat ALL those 'big' teams at home last season but got deservedly walloped by Salford and Harlequins. I'd stop digging if I were you!

I'm sorry, what's your point?

Which one?



The one where you said

Because, and correct me if I am wrong, you don't seem to mention league positions or crowds. You talk about it being an easy start but, as demonstrated, and I repeat because you seem to struggle to understand the point, it [icould[/i be an easier start. We could have gotten to play the teams you listed three of which, yourself included, weren't playoff teams.



Yes you did but not until later. Not until the, frankly, stupidity of your initial point was demonstrated to you did you attempt an obvious back track by claiming you meant the size of the big crowds certain teams bring, Yes, of course, that is obviously what you meant by inferring we had easier games. You meant we had games before lesser crowds. BTW, there were over ten thousand at Celtic on Friday. How many did the Bulls average last year? Don't answer because its' clear crowd size wasn't your point and, if it was, it was even dumber than your original point you now seek to distance yourself from.

When have I been crass, unfounded and arrogant? Maybe possibly the second occasionally, but i've nothing to be arrogant about atm.

Right, I was thinking of letting this one go, but you also don't seem to grasp what I am tring to say.



I do have respect for the teams you have your opening games against, we ere wll beaten by all of them at some point last season. Sorry if I seem arrogant, I'm not trying to, and I'm not trying to have a dig either, what I simply meant was -and I'm sure you could at least try and understand- it's often more intimidating to play against a club with past successes and grand final experience, who tend to bring more fans than against one lacking these, especially early on in the season.



I take your comment about Bradford's attendances on board, but it was still better than Crusaders, Salford, Wakefield and Castleford last season.



You can reply if you want, but i'm not going to bite anymore, it's clear you are just looking for an argument and tbh i can' really be bothered, looking forward to the new season and I may be back arguing with you after we've played you. Good luck for 2010.

You didn't show it.



With the greatest of respect I don't think that is what you meant at all and I think what you meant is perfectly clear but, like you I think we've canvassed this sufficiently so I will move on.



Absolutely. Because what you initially insinuated irked me and your transparent back track irked even more.



Me too, on both counts.



I know you don't really mean that but thanks anyway and same to you.

Right, over and done with? I know I said I wouldn't post back, but tbh I expected you to argue even more

. I think generally I just didn't make my point very well, and my original point was a non sober one







Oh, and don't worry, I don't think you mean it either

Make love not war.





It's very sweet.

Ewwenorfolk...thought you'd have cottoned on by now not to take on one of the lawyers, unless your own defenses are robust and you have considerable artillery (and time...) of your own at your disposal? Or, failing that, call up your own reinforcements (the 'Vark likes nothing better than taking on one of his own...) and retire while they stonk the living daylights out of each other - which has the added advantage of providing hours of fun for the rest of us observers!



Alternatively, just plead you were pîssed when you first posted, and their attack collapses anyway...



Simples!

I can never remember that in the heat of battle though Adey, you know that

And now he will be sending you a bill for his time too...

Nice to see the vidiot ref continuing on from last year and getting it wrong

Lets pretend I was playing devils advocate all along and actually understood and agreed with the point Ewwenforlk was making. If that were the case, which is not admitted, I am just pleased nobody spotted the incriminating and contradictory evidence that is out there, theoretically speaking of course.

Whinos still whinging! bit early to hit the panic button, wait till after the WCC!

Excellent observation sir.



What were you observing btw?

Hey ewenfork,



If only the RFL had let us play the Bulls in the warm up to the WCC.



You owe Wakefield and Castleford a rather large apology.

So you are again automatically assuming you would win that are you?

Again?



I would never dis-respect quality, playoff calibre opponents like castleford and Wakefield. Re-read the thread. Quite the opposite, I had nothing but respect for our up-coming opponents, unlike the Bulls posters on here.



However, its' not dis-respectful to say thet the Bulls, who are not a playoff team and don't have a win to their name this year, would've been easier opposition for us, whowever much ewenfork still thinks this is 1997-2005 and you are in some way superior to teams that actually make the playoffs.

I don't think we're superior atm, I can guarantee you that. And yes, foolish comments earlier on, but I don't care I still take great delight in seeing you lose (although not so much when we're losing aswell).