After the Castleford game their seemed to be a split in opionion which was the most important outcome from a game the result or the performance.

Bit of a daft poll really. RESULT is always the key and always the most important. Who wants a team that performs well but never wins??? Performance is definately important and something you can take heart from. If you put in the performance you can go away knowing you tried your best. Ultimately tho, performances dont matter, Results do!

An improving performance is a positive but not as positive as a win IMO.

As far as our next game in the league goes, I couldn't care less how we play. If we manage to get a win, I'll be very very happy. If we lose but play fantastically, I'll be miffed.

I put "performance" but I don't think it's a sensible question, the way you've done it.

Obviously, if you say is it better for a team to play great but lose every game, or to play boring rubbish but win every game, then it is better for the club's league position and survival to win. Though I would expect, in such an unlikely extreme, that its crowds would gradually fall away - but what do I know, when tens of thousands turn out to watch Onion penaltythons?

The reality is that a team should aim to play fine, entertaining rugby with perhaps the Saints of recent years as the best example. We'd all love, and obviously prefer, our team to play breathtaking, expansive rugby and thrill us for 80 minutes with their supreme skill. However, you have to have a base on which to build. That base is usually a solid defence, and there is no doubt that a team, in a season, in a single game, and over a period of years, can perform better once the important job of winning is done.

So it is not a sensible question, because it is never an "either - or" choice.

And the answer would change depending on the circumstances, too. For example, at the moment, most fans would be happy to see the Bulls grind out wins, by any means necessary, against Catalans in the Cup, and then against Leeds. It would matter much less to me, at the moment, how well or badly we played if we achieved that.

Circumstances.

Whilst the natural outcome of sych an "either-or" poll is always going to be "result", I doubt many would argue with my analysis.

I'd also say that there is a case in the Cas match for saying either. The result was the main thing, as we lost, and we really needed a win; but then the performance was, for most of the match, really an excellent effort in many respects, and the best we've played so far. That was important too.

Definately a result is more important than how we play, if we can play Sh!te and still win then that'll do for me.

maybe so in the short term - but let's say all the Bulls played for 2 years was Sh!te, Sh!te and more Sh!te, for how long would you keep paying at the gate?

Playing poorly and winning is only the sign of a good team when you're generaly playing well and winning and the occassional lapse doesn't harm you. Doing it on the back of playing poorly and losing is hardly going to fill me with hope.

If we play well and still lose after a run of playing poorly and losing then I'm a little happier.

It's entirely context specific, and in this context playing well counts as a result for me. Continually playing well but losing is a different matter.

I haven't voted, the question is nonsensical.

Surely though if you were playing e yet getting the wins the gates would increase. I can see what your sayin and performance is important but if come October Bulls have got to Old Trafford and won by playing poorly but getting results, I think you will be alot happier than if you performed well all season but came 8th or whatever. I agreed on the whole with what you said on your previous post though, its entirely specific to situation.

Performance for me everytime. If the team performs to the best of its ability I will have no qualms with us being outplayed by better teams and the occasional loss due to bad luck or Ganson taking charge.

But I don't think we are performing to our best and you have to ask whether the right individuals are in place at the club to make this happen. This is not meant to be a dig at Macca by the way

Yes the signs were there for most of the game against Cas but its was the performance in the last quarter that really upset me. Some of the players need to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror instead of bleating to the press about how their individual performaces are good just the rest of the team are letting the side down (yes, I'm talking about you Mr. Jefferies).

Why oh why were we unlucky to sign Bird just when immigration was tighteniing as I reckon he would have transformed the team sadly it is not to be and we will have to make do with the 'talent' at the club already

Performance anyday.

I would rather see us lose by two points in thrillers like the one on Sunday, then win by 18+ every game in a dull bore-fest

I agree with all that. Against Catalan and Leeds in the next two games the result is [iall [/ithat matters - it could be two 1-0 wins and awful rugby I wouldnt care less. However, if we show a continued improved performance like we showed for most of the Cas game then that makes the results more likely to be more positive more consitantly.

In the long term (over a season) good results will only happen with good performance (with the odd exception), and getting good results will generally help good performance due to increased confidence. In the mid to long term I dont think you can have one without the other.

I also have not voted as its a daft way to ask an excellent question for discussion.

Without trying to sound like our dear departed ME how long will speccies keep turning up to watch us lose no matter how well we play, try telling an eight year old that "yes we lost but we played well". I'd much rather say " we played badly but, we still won"

This poll reminds me of back when me and the wife were starting our family

1999-2005 must have been prtetty disappointing for you then.

Well I've managed it for some decades, for one. Appreciate the good times much more than I suppose someone who hasn't.

My lad also has a philosophical outlook on life in general and sport in particular. I had that conversation, or on that subject, many times, and he learned from me that to lose with good grace is fine, winning isn't everything or even close, and that there are much more important things in life than winning, but very few more important than behaving like a true rugby league person.

You learn to appreciate the wins more when you've had some bad times. I couldn't help but think that a lot of Bulls fans had grown complacent on the success of the side 96-05. A few years in the doldrums will make us value success more when it eventually returns.

This is specifically NOT having a go at anyone, but the fact is that most members of the NT would not be with us a few years in the doldrums. Maybe not even a few months! They would jump back on the post-doldrumnal bandwagon pretty sharp though.

As is, of course, their perfect right.

perhaps a better question is would you rather see improvements in results or performance?

Improving performance indicates the team (players and coaches) are doing the right things while results can be entirely dependant on who you are playing. So over any run of games I'd rather see improved performances.

except of course on April the 10th.

I'll still be here. I'm a sucker for punishment.

But I'd like to making my stance clear. I think the current team are 2/3 players away from being a force again. But I don't have any faith in McNamara's ability to coach the side towards winning silverware.

Even if the team say lost all of the games.

I agree a strike and a halfback with a bit of vision and we would be an entirely different proposition.

Yeah I think you're right. Can't help thinking that totally new (quality) centres and half backs would make us a brilliant team. Obviously not enough money etc. but it would make us a lot better. Jeffries and Sykes are improving but still not good enough for a top team imo.

I wasn't replacing Jefferies.

No, he's moving on up, and also not Nero. Is there any in SL currently playing better? I'd say not.