Good performance last night, and thats all that was needed. Warrington are a quality side, they wont lose many this year, but we can take a lot from that game. 2 of Warrington's tries should have been chalked off and Bridge should have been red carded, nobody can defend that, but they took there chances and probably deserved the win.

Imo, the passer was crabbing sideways along the line, not going forward so even though he turned his body before passing, there [iwas[/i no momentum (except towards the stand). Not only that, but the wind, which was mainly blowing across the pitch into the stand was also angling back in the direction of Rooley lane, and the scorer still caught the ball two and half yards in front of where it was passed from.

My biggest problem is that this kind of 'try' is allowed on very regular basis these days and we've had the benefit of more than one or two.....so 'twould be churlish to go an about it too much

yes 1 try should and could of been chalked off for the forward but im struggling to see any foul play in the other scores , great effort from the bulls thou if you can keep them performances up you will finish in top 6 imo

Waterhouses try was not double movement so no probs with it..riley looked across and slowed down a bit..but you could say he knew he wasnt gonna get ball so why should he run at full speed and be tired/risk straining owt..he didnt change direction/lean in to defender so try.

Rileys was so forward it was a joke..gawd knows what stokesy was doing on touch, probably his finger nails..im sure he actually asked alibert what his flag was for and he said for the goals.
Thats the only one that should have been chalked off.

Superb performance all round. I predicted a Bulls win by 2 points, and with an equal rub of the green, an even share of luck (but when did we last have anything like that) and equal treatment by the officials I reckon we would have sneaked it.

If the forward pass try is seen by our refs controller; along with Halibut being unbelievably suckered by Carvell on several occasions; and then Bridge's disgraceful elbow drop; then the touchie and Halibut must surely be given a week in league 6, that was just a plain disgrace. Carvell knocked the ball out of Manu's firm grasp twice, but the maost absurd thing was when Carvell backhanded a pass after he had been tackled, with no Bulls player anywhere near him, yet Halibut gave them a pen! I'm sorry, but this loevel of myopia deserves a reffing break. And I don't generally mind Halibut as a ref but he and his touchies had a mare.

The Platt try should have been given, on the benefit of the doubt. I'd argue his foot was on the field of play, with teh curved part of the boot over the line (but thus not touching the line) at the moment the ball touched the grass. Which moment was between video frames, yet he was judged on the second of 2 frames, even though the ball was clearly well grounded by then. But as has been said there were 2 tries that would have been given in a non-TV match, yet why does Halibut pick and choose which contentious calls to go to the VR for, when he has the option? We get this a lot, refs ignoring the VR and making a decision on what must be an extremely close call, and I don't understand it. They are taking chances and taking liberties. It's a cavalier approach.

Manu had an excellent debut apart from being suckered a couple of times after the tackle, and looks a potentially huge asset in every way. All credit to Burgess for doubling up, and Jeffries (although his kicking wasn't as good as last week) again did his job very well.

All in all a fine effort from the Bulls, if only we could find a way to produce these goods consistently.

I thought the performance last night was a big step in the right direction. I just hope that we can put in similar amounts of effort into our performances this year. The defence was once again a lot more solid and it was a real team effort. The Riley try was clearly forward, to suggest his hands were pointing backwards is complete nonsense. It was a poor call from the officials. I think the Atkins try was a tough one, it might not break any rules but I thought it was a little bit poor form from Riley. He clearly slowed down to impede Crookes, it not the sort of RL I want to see and he a better player than that.

The scoreline probably flattered Wire a little in the end, with a bit more luck we would have had a couple more scores on the board. I do however still have some concerns about our attack, but hopefully this will improved as the season progresses.

No complaints about the loss, it was still a much better performance than we're use to at Odsal. I hope they players take the positives from this game and do the same at Hull KR next week. Consistency should be the word in training this week!

Agree with most posters on the VR tries being unfortunate but correct plus the Bridge red card and Riley's forward pass. I also thought Manase had the ball reefed a couple of time.

CalumLW makes the point that Jeffries chose the wrong runner on occasion and I'd agree. On 3 or 4 occasions in the second half we had play the balls on the right with Briers flat footed on his own line and the Wire defence tired and not moving up and he chose the Langley crash ball. Whilst Langley was superb last night it was crying out for two long passes to get Lulia up against Briers and Bridge. Briers was injured and Bridge was gonna hurt someone and we should have taken Langley and Bateman out of the move and gone BJ, Sammut, Kearney, Lulia, Crookes.

Of course it's dead easy from the stand but if we're gonna improve we must move the ball faster to Lulia's wing. I also didn't understand the logic of our 5th tackle kicks. Whitehead, Lulia and BK take 3 out of the air last week this week we didn't really try it.

I've slated Hargreaves on here but have to take it back. Against Wakey and Wire he's been very good. Carvell apart our pack held it's own. Overall though a really good game and a marked step forward.

Next week Alchemy Aardvark will explain how to turn water into wine.