Re: Toronto (A) : Sat May 04, 2019 6:59 pm  

A game we were never going to win but the lads gave it their all I think we did well

Re: Toronto (A) : Sat May 04, 2019 7:05 pm  

That was a good effort up until the last 10 mins. The defence was very very good, we just lacked a bit of size, a bit of class in the halves and maybe a real speedster.(?) Overall a very good showing, great experience for the younger lads and will set them up for the rest of the season. Now they know that they can compete at this level in the top four, and with the addition of one classy older head, we should stay in the tip 3 or 4.
Would be good to see a very good experienced centre come in so that Minichello can dictate from the middle. That might be the difference between top four and below.
Well done Bradford Bulls.

Re: Toronto (A) : Sat May 04, 2019 7:16 pm  

Despite the loss I think that's up there with the best we've played all season. Fantastic defense, a very high completion rate and we even looked relatively competent with ball in hand!
There were cutout passes! Dummy runners! Offloads! We even scored a try from further than 40 yards out!

If we can play like that every week we will win a lot more games than we lose and I will be a very happy bunny.

Re: Toronto (A) : Sat May 04, 2019 7:24 pm  

JTCFJG wrote:

:) That was a good effort up until the last 10 mins. The defence was very very good, we just lacked a bit of size, a bit of class in the halves and maybe a real speedster.(?) Overall a very good showing, great experience for the younger lads and will set them up for the rest of the season. Now they know that they can compete at this level in the top four, and with the addition of one classy older head, we should stay in the tip 3 or 4.
Would be good to see a very good experienced centre come in so that Minichello can dictate from the middle. That might be the difference between top four and below.
Well done Bradford Bulls.

Like Webster, Evans or Hitchcox for example?

Re: Toronto (A) : Sat May 04, 2019 8:04 pm  

Very pleased,Great team effort and never gave up.Roll on next Saturday.

Re: Toronto (A) : Sat May 04, 2019 9:14 pm  

Everyone has a opinion, and I think yes they played well and didn’t deserve that final score, but to nullify our most lethal player by playing him in the centre didn’t give me any confidence pre kick off, and it certainly justified my thoughts after

Re: Toronto (A) : Sat May 04, 2019 9:54 pm  

Watched the game on Sky. I agree the defence was excellent for the most part until I assume tiredness or momentum took over. The effort that went into that defence was really pleasing to watch.

As far as the attack goes, I now get what people on here who still go to the games have been saying. Whilst I understand that the kick for touch on the 5th is about territory and having patience, I do think that had a large factor in the loss. Being happy to constantly play for territory when it's a close game is fine if it stays close. But if they'd have chanced their arm a few times, tried something a bit more positive, they may have had more points on the board when Toronto started to take over and made it a different game.
The attack didn't just look poor in quality, it was really negative. Perhaps out of necessity if you don't have anyone out there who can create good last tackle options, but even if that's the reason, it's very concerning.

Losing to Toronto is nothing to be ashamed of though. They are the best team in the competition by an absolute mile. This season isn't about beating them to promotion, it's about consolidating the place in the Championship and looking to build towards promotion in the future.

Re: Toronto (A) : Sat May 04, 2019 11:57 pm  

HamsterChops wrote:

Watched the game on Sky. I agree the defence was excellent for the most part until I assume tiredness or momentum took over. The effort that went into that defence was really pleasing to watch.

As far as the attack goes, I now get what people on here who still go to the games have been saying. Whilst I understand that the kick for touch on the 5th is about territory and having patience, I do think that had a large factor in the loss. Being happy to constantly play for territory when it's a close game is fine if it stays close. But if they'd have chanced their arm a few times, tried something a bit more positive, they may have had more points on the board when Toronto started to take over and made it a different game.
The attack didn't just look poor in quality, it was really negative. Perhaps out of necessity if you don't have anyone out there who can create good last tackle options, but even if that's the reason, it's very concerning.

Losing to Toronto is nothing to be ashamed of though. They are the best team in the competition by an absolute mile. This season isn't about beating them to promotion, it's about consolidating the place in the Championship and looking to build towards promotion in the future.

It's a simple, basic tactic that means the opposing team don't get to make any unopposed yardage.

We gave a good account of ourselves today - yes, we should where we are weakest, namely in having someone give us the ability to break through the line but we were never going to beat Toronto on their home patch. If we finish the season in a play-off spot, then I'll consider it a good season for Bradford and expect us to built into 2020

Re: Toronto (A) : Sun May 05, 2019 12:14 am  

HamsterChops wrote:

Watched the game on Sky. I agree the defence was excellent for the most part until I assume tiredness or momentum took over. The effort that went into that defence was really pleasing to watch.

As far as the attack goes, I now get what people on here who still go to the games have been saying. Whilst I understand that the kick for touch on the 5th is about territory and having patience, I do think that had a large factor in the loss. Being happy to constantly play for territory when it's a close game is fine if it stays close. But if they'd have chanced their arm a few times, tried something a bit more positive, they may have had more points on the board when Toronto started to take over and made it a different game.
The attack didn't just look poor in quality, it was really negative. Perhaps out of necessity if you don't have anyone out there who can create good last tackle options, but even if that's the reason, it's very concerning.

Losing to Toronto is nothing to be ashamed of though. They are the best team in the competition by an absolute mile. This season isn't about beating them to promotion, it's about consolidating the place in the Championship and looking to build towards promotion in the future.

Our attack today was a huge improvement on what we've been serving up for the past few weeks. Go and watch the Dewsbury/Barrow home matches for a more accurate reflection of how we normally play.
If you thought our attack today was bad, it's probably for the best you're not attending many games anymore

Re: Toronto (A) : Sun May 05, 2019 7:40 am  

Gave it to them for 60mins. They knew they were in a game. Experience told in the end.

Don't know why Gibson isnt playing but deffo missed Minchella in the middle. I'd abandon that experiment. EM in the centre doesn't bring anything different than AG in that position and we are taking Elliot out of the game. I think we could do with a experienced backrower too, but Minchellas talent goes some way to making up that gap in my opinion.

Definitely missed Webster and Evans in the centres, Leutele punished us. I like DFG and Grants enthusiasm but they're positional sense seems somewhat lacking.

Ethan Ryan at FB doesn't work for me, doesn't have e the link play or positional awareness with the ball in hand, positioning defending a bit suspect as well. He's good under the high ball and makes important tackles at times but he's much better on the wing.

Wildie organisation missed, Flanagan mongrel missed, loved Hallas go forward and tenacity though. He is the heart beat as Barrie MC mentioned.

As mentioned Below thought it was a really good effort. Now half of the season gone it's evident that we really need to sign a natural full back.