Not sure how it works but does Eddie not have a Facebook or Twitter account we can bombard with complaints about his one sided anti Wakefield fuelled agenda - this is not the first time! Keep it civil. Just a thought any ideas?

The greater picture regarding Bradford hasn't eluded me, they now have to win a minimum of four games, that's disregarding the ongoing points debacle.

It's always nice to beat Leeds, especially in the last minute after a controversial call actually went our way.

Just watched it for the first time tonight, could Eddie Hemmings get more negative about us, the guy's pathetic, Leeds under strength, best time to play Wigan(who we beat) and Leeds (who we beat) no mention of our players out injured, bleated on about our players on loan. Jeez

Vastman has the best idea regards Hemmings if he has a facebook page lets bombard it to death but do be civil.
Wasn't at the game but watched it at a Union club house with a few of their ex players and they enjoyed it well done the players some real effort that wasn't showing a few games ago roll on Thursday.

yes why not call down earlier at the club and say directly to him in a manner that he might listen to you rather bombard him with complaints

Form an orderly queue

From the Sporting Life match report...

"Both Wakefield and Leeds went into the contest with a number of key personnel missing and they were closely matched throughout."

How easy was that Eddie ?????

Which team does Eddie support is it widnes or warrington. Thought it was one of the two.

Im sure its Warrington.
The problem seems to be that Eddie obviously didn't take any time to investigate both teams. The Leeds teams more high profile and almost anyone with an interest could point out the missing players.
I just wish the team in general would concentrate on providing a good match commentary, how often do they discuss Stevos hair, its now old hat material.
If you are going to draw attention to one teams injuries, it seems only right to include both teams. It could be Eddie didn't know.

I would of thought by now that we are used to the fact that if we win it is because our opponents are riddled with injuries. It is always so and will forever be so I don't get too concerned about what Sky say because they are just providing the standard excuse spouted by some coaches.
I will say that the Leeds coach never expressed this view however, I have noticed that there are a number that do use an excuse to cover up a loss with the current worse offenders being Wane and Anderson.

leeds had seven out, we had six out - yet sky still miss the point.
Its one of the reasons i no longer pay to Sky.

Read in a paper who were interviewing him about his role with Sky that it is St Helens

Think Eddie kept banging on about how many Leeds had out, because then if Owen hadn't scored the winner, he and Stevo could have covered each other in the other's glory about how great Leeds academy production line is!
Were Leeds bad or made to look bad because Wake didn't let them play how they wanted?
In the end, the difference was a couple of poor missed conversions by Sutcliffe, that Sinfield would have potted.

Beauty of it as well was the so called super dooper academy got smashed also the next day. .

It's all part of the narrative isn't it; they create one in the build-up to the game, then everything is twisted to fit that narrative; often based on which of the usual suspects is a studio guest - Jamie Peacock is an old warrior, Leeds are under-strength but 'Barrie's Babes' are stepping up to the mark, Wakey are playing teams at the right time, blah blah blah.

I wish they'd just call what was in front of them and stop labouring under the misconception that they are entertaining or funny in any way; unlike the Aussie commentary teams, very few of the team have the wit or charisma to pull that off.