Brilliant!

Another one where you're slightly off. Ian Smith had a look at his touch judge who was stood by the coner post to indicate he was unsure of whether is should be a try or not. But dont let that get in the way of your anti-leeds agenda.

Sinfield is the rl version of John Terry.

Radford throws some punches in retaliation, off, Wellans does the same, nothing,

not only did he tell the ref to look at the TV he actually made contact with the official to let his point be known , is that not an offence in itself ?
leeds have beed getting away with bending the rules for a few years now , they are forever winning penalties by kidding the ref and the likes of sinfield and Senior are forever in the refs ear .

lets just hope that Wigan can stroll past them on Sunday , come on The Warriors !!!!!!!!!!!!

So you're listening to (albeit alternate) Sky commentators. Did anyone actually see the Touch Judge standing at the corner flag or not?

Are people really suggesting that what Bailey did deserved to be punished by a penalty let alone a sending-off or possible suspension?

Difference is Wellens punches would not have burst a wet paper bag

Thought Redford deserved a Red TBH but Bailey should have gone to the bin for 10 lets see what the disciplinary have to say about it both could get called before them think Radford will get a fine and no ban (as he served nearly a 1 match ban at the game) and Bailey will get a fine if they are both sent for.

Penalty, definitely - he was the first offender with repeated elbows to Radford's head. One alone could have been excused as him trying to get up, but there were at least 4 hits.

Radford retaliated, and both should have been yellow carded.

A bit of biff always adds spice to the game if you ask me, Radford at most should have been sent to the bin along with Bailey and then when they both came back on it would have been great to watch them go at each other.

Taken from George Riley's twitter. Certainly made me laugh.

Awful refereeing.

Bailey should have got 10 for use of the elbow, Radford 10 for retaliating.

Penalty to Hull.

The elbows were out of order, but its done the job of getting a man sent off (probably rightly, although I'd have been happy with a yellow).

Did keith mason get a ban for stepping on fielden's ankle the other week? I class the two incedents similary. Disguised foul play that's not enought to injure, but enought to hurt and rile up the victim into blowing his lid.

Also, how lame did Bailey look, waiting until half a dozen players were holding Radford to decide he fancied having a go back, then trying to head butt sean long!? He may as well been saying "hold me back lads, hold me back".

Personally, I thought it should have been penalty to Hull with both players put in the Sin Bin.

I'd class Radford's actions as retaliation to Bailey commiting the first offence by using the eblow.

Sitaution would have been dealt with by not going OTT.

If we had two refs, a la the NRL, would one have been Johnny on the spot at the play of the ball and interpereted the situation differently, acknowledging the elbows?