bradford beat us after we kept making errors simple really

Right don't shoot me down but Thaler was very pedantic from the off with his decision making inconsistent for both sides.

But what he did do when watching him closely while Harvey Wiles was doing the commentary, was that he was constantly looking at our clearance from around the ruck after the tackle and IMO unduly penalising us for very minor offences.

Minor offences well they should be picked up and penalised - I hear you say, but when Castleford were defending he to be honest simply turned a blind eye on the clearance of the ruck and the offences that they were committing.

To prove his inconsistency for both sides the penalty count was 10-3 to Castleford when Heath L'Estrange was sin-binned for holding down in the 56th minute, while it stood at 11-5 after Castleford's Jake Emmitt was sin-binned for doing the same (holding down) in 68th minute.

You to have to feel for the Castleford supporters on that one as during the ten minutes from Heath L'Estrange being sin-binned to Jake Emmitt's sin-binning, Thaler gave Bradford two penalties and Castleford the sole one.

Myself and Harvey certainly didn't see Thaler give Castleford a warning and so it came as utter bewilderment when out came the yellow card for Emmitt's sin-binning.

During Castleford's period of being down to twelve men, Bradford sealed victory with Luke Gale's penalty and then after another wasted Castleford raid down the right, with Brett Kearney darting over from 20 yards out.

Luke Gale again keeping his unblemished record of four from four to complement the 100% conversion rate of last week.

Got to agree, i thought thaler was pretty generous tbh.
Never known him give so many decisions for us.


We lost because we couldn't hold onto the ball in attacking positions
Our ball retention was very poor.

Its not how many , its when and where. Can you explain Emmets sin binning ? ........... no thought not, neither can anyone else.

thanks for the name calling , it just lets me know i am dealing with a lower intelligence

byee

I would like to know why Thaler gave Bradford four warnings before giving a yellow card, yet sin-binned Emmitt without a single warning to Cas.

I am not one of these people who has a beef with referee's, but yesterday Thaler didn't look across the defensive line at all in the first half and Bradford were constantly off side. infact I remember one occasion where a Bradford player was stood directly in front of Thaler. With regards to laying on, Cas were laying on for 5-6 seconds (too long) and slightly longer for some dominant tackles, whereas Bradford were laying on for 7-8 seconds and over ten seconds for some dominant tackles. I honestly believe that someone should have been sin-binned after the second warning on about the 30 minute mark.

I don't like stop start rugby with a high penalty count, but I also dislike constant spoiling.

Fair play to Bradford, they got away with it and found a way to win the game and lets be honest thats what you have to do in crappy conditions.

According to Basil in his post match press conference shown on the Tigers website rlhttps://www.castigers.com/article.php?id ,
He asked Thaler why Emmit was penalised and sent to the bin and he (Thaler) said that Emmit had been offside and prevented a try scoring opportunity for the Bulls so the Ref was put in a no-win situation where he had to bin Jake.
Makes sense cos we were wondering why we had Jake binned yet had no official warning , Its just a shame that the officials can't let the fans now their decisions more clearly, at times yesterday I found Thalers hand signals very confusing

BTW Watch the video of the press conference to see Basil give one of the Journos a bollocking for asking a question then turning his back on Basil lol

Delboy66(aye of the tigers fanzine)

Further to that, Emmitt tackled their player about 10 metres from our line and there were other players in attendance. Sounds like a poor excuse to me.

Can't win - we don't get an explaination and its a fix, he gives one and it is a poor excuse. Referee's don't care, whatever you think who wins and who doesn't they call what they see. Go watch some game as a neutral and see how one eyed and one way the crowd see decisions.

You are entitled to your opinion of course! My views are my own personally!

Anyone with an ounce of sense would have realised as soon as ben failure got a cas match that we would be up against the wall. He proved everyone right by ignoring laying on and persistant offsides for the away side only. If you went , you would have seen that

Whilst he did make some mistakes, there can be no argument that we got plenty of penalties in response to the Bulls tactics. It's true there was a lot went unpunished but just imagine how much more boring the game would've been if he'd acted on that as well.

For me there should've been more focus on cleaning up the play-the-ball which was slowed to a crawl whenever we were in possession, and certainly action should've been taken sooner. The explanation for the Emmitt sinbinning is at least an explanation, however doesn't seem to fit the circumstances at the time. One could argue that Bradford prevented any number of try-scoring opportunities by being offside in their own ten metre area throughout the game.

Refereeing performances in Super League often lack consistency however we got our penalties on Sunday yet did nothing with the advantage.

But failure should have used his yellow card for their persistant offsides instead of saving it to level it out. I think there is consistancy, especially with failure and bentham, they shouldnt be allowed near a game of rugby

I sometimes think I watch a different game.
I agree there are some inconsitencies - but mostly inconsistency is in the eye of the beholder. I think you have to have an ounce of sense to appreciate this as well.

I think it would be fairer to say that our mistakes cost us the game and our own failure to complete high and stop Bradford believing in themselves as I said before the game on that thread. So we can heap it on Ben Thaler, who incidentally I am no great fan of in a professional sense, but to do so doesn't give Bradford enough credit and allows the players too much excuse.

If we had taken care of the things we can influence, then we would have won.

We were crap, that much possesion near to their line and we couldnt finish, dont blame the ref, or the bulls, they played a very simple game to which we allowed them to dominate, Their no7 was outstanding in those conditions

I don't think anyone is blaming Thaler in the entirety for our loss. That would be flipping ridiculous. However, my point was merely reflective of that was that it was an unjustifiable, poor excuse based on what he said.