unfortunately for leeds, everyone else and the game in general, leeds default setting when being found wanting seems to be kicking off like petulant children.

Smacks very much of a school bully provoking the smaller, weaker kid into the slightest retaliation and then punching him, very classy.

Probably so. Its rugby league, props bullying half-backs has been an integral part of the game since Methuselah was playing under 6's.

Your faux mourning for a golden age when Leeds were more virtuous than any other club is funny but also a fairly transparent and easily dismissed rhetorical device. You'll be telling us "Leeds used to be my second team" next.

But funnier still is your myopic view of the Bailey situation and the apparent innocence of Huddersfield in everything. For me, Bailey took on Brown, the first punches per se were landed pretty much simultaneously and both should have gone. The [ipoor little Kevin[/i argument stands up to no scrutiny whatsoever, especially since the penalty was given in Bailey's favour. O'Donnell's sending off was as textbook as they come - he ran in to cause trouble, automatic red card. 'Softcock' Bailey's ability to land purer and harder punches than his opponents once it's on is, frankly, not really relevant.

I had the pleasure of speaking to Thaler for ten minutes post-game and his view of the various bits of Huddersfield niggle were enlightening, as was his version of Bailey ("they all want to punch him" which ties in with everything Leeds fans say about this penalty-winning machine). I got the impression that whoever did that trip on a Leeds player at the SE end of the ground shortly thereafter was very lucky as Thaler was reluctant to put Hudds down to 10 men.

You'll never get them 10 mins back

Has his opinion of us changed since his comments the other year in Catalan?

I doubt it

Well after Thaler completely lost control of the game, i am sure he was looking for someone to talk too after the game ended.. As for Thaler saying everyone wants to punch bailey then maybe the refs have now wised up that his niggling, dirty, or foul behaviour is what cuases other players to want to punch him. If the refs were clued up to penalise Bailey then maybe everyone would not want to punch him.

Thaler had a fine game; "losing control" of it is rubbish and he was in good spirits post game, as he should be because he got the big decision right. Nathan Brown's little hissy fit is very revealing and his inabilty to control his emotions is interesting.

It's interesting that Jamie Bloem's comments on Radio Leeds seconds ago re-reviewing the incident fully back up the position as I have explained it. You unfortunately seem unable to remove the claret & gold specs for even five minutes.

Now if you were independent that may have some credibility. Your a Leeds fans for christs sake

Barely

I'm just interested in the truth

the big decision sending off bailey was right but not o'donnell..the guy didnt even throw a punch, he just ran in like every other player. infact senior should of gone too with his punches.

anyway leeds had already lost the game by then, outclassed-outfought-outplayed!!!!

as for jamie bloem..he never has a nice thing to say about the giants.

Running in is a mandatory sending off, (and especially so I would say with the aggression and clear intent O'Donnell did it with). Being floored by Bailey before he could get a punch in himself is therefore irrelevant.

You are starting to confirm my suspicion that Giants fans believe the laws should only apply to other teams.

No it is not otherwise 10 players a week would be sent off.



Being floored by Bailey before he could get a punch in himself is therefore irrelevant. No it is not, Punching is a specific offence,

LOD did not get floored.

The laws are for both teams. You are the one making completely factual errors and making yourself look a right @r?e. You should quit before the hole you are digging gets deeper.

so not Classic Bailey

Nope, it isnt