The Eastmond try wasn't a try and was deservedly chalked off...just.

We've all seen 'em given, haven't we?

On the Eastmond try, as jonni says we've all seen them given. There's arguments for and against it, fair result in the end.

Nothing wrong with the Lynch penalty but Wilkin should have been penalised for the late hit on Herbert.

But imagine if the boot had been on the other foot and it was your two points. Regardless of what he missed or got wrong or whatever (and there was all three for both sides in that match), that call was crucial. Gaskell is not slow. He looks like he should be but he isn't. There is every chance he could have got to that ball faster than the two Bradford players. It was only right he should have the fair chance to do so with only seconds left on the clock just as it would have been had the roles been reversed. In fact, that call was probably his most important because there was no way back as time had run out.

I don't think it was late, Herbert was falling backwards when he kicked the ball and Wilkin hit him as it left his foot.

Not that it matters now, a fair draw.

Deffo penalty.

Hopefully the RFL will reflect on Disko's comments and realise that they were made immediately after the game when adrenaline and emotion are running high.

Then again, we're talking about the RFL . . . . . bugger

Tomkins is Mother Theresa compared to Wilkin in my book. An overrated flat track bully if ever there was one. But there was nothing wrong with the tackle on Herbert.

It was high, though.

Childs seems to miss a lot IMO, was the same in the hudds game

Having watched it again, it's a hard one to call and I can see why it wouldn't be given.

But what about Wilkin's massive hit on Kearney? His knees went into Kearney first. And the smirk when he gets away with a rip really pi$$es me off!

I didn't notice the knees I must say. But I did see his smirk. He really is an arrogant, cocky piece of sh it.
Trying to be more positive, the hits from Elima & Sio were absolute belters.