The AOB thing can only have one outcome and that is him going to a SL club in the off season.

Why if he was so in demand he would have been snapped up when he was out of contract. Our fan's seem to think AOB is up their with Cameron Smith.

We totally missed OBs darts from dummy half yesterday. He could have won several penalties by targeting Fev's offside players. A few penalties might have made a bit of a difference.

I can't really be bothered any more commenting on all the other stuff. I'm so disillusioned by the whole debacle at the moment, that I really can't be bothered.

I do have one question though. If the logic of going with the (incredibly) slow but bigger hookers was to give some size to the pack, why did he only pick 2 props and a load of back rowers? Let's have some big hookers but small props? Eh? I appreciate Clough, Lauaki & Clark were supposedly injured. But the likes of Fleming & Walker (whilst we all know they're not that good) are playing elsewhere on loan, so the idea we have no props doesn't really wash does it? Not to mention that nothing has been said to suggest Crossley was injured too.

I'm not saying it would have changed things, but the logic fails me.

I really like Rohan but I just cannot defend the decision to drop O'Brien. The technical side has been discussed above but what about the mental aspect of the decision?

The biggest game for years and we drop the player with the biggest heart! Who's gonna put his body on the line for the club, O'Brien who has come through the system, turned down SL and stuck with us through thick and thin or an on loan mercenary from Warrington who has a club to go back to in a couple of weeks time? I just can't get my head around it.

Was shocked he wasn't in your team ,he got you right back into the game at Leigh

Isn't it blindingly obvious - and not just from yesterday - Smith simply does not rate O'Brien.

He's been given, what, 15 minutes in recent games? Haworth has been drafted in and preferred, with O'Brien reduced to an impact player against a tiring defence.

I'm not trying to justify the decision, it seems really odd to me - but we can't say that it hasn't been coming.

Well i'm in no better mood this morning.

It's OK everyone though, the players are absolutely hurting. They talk a good game on twitter. Chev apparently saying the mantra is the same "They don't quit" If they played as good a game as they spout about on twitter, we'd do alright.

Where was the DNQ mantra against Dewsbury x2, Sheffield, Halifax x2, Fev, Batley. They should be ashamed of themselves. It's almost like they think we can regroup and go again next year like nothings changed. This could have repercussions for us for years to come.

All bluff, no stuff. Can't bring myself to read players' comments on Twitter, it will probably just make me throw my phone at the wall. And that's not fair on the phone or the wall, as it's not their fault.

Spot on. Next years strap line should be #doingourbestnottochoke

Dropping OB was a clanger and Smith has admitted that.

However even if he'd been picked I'm not sure he would've made much difference since we lacked the power up front to give him a platform to scoot out of dummy half which is his strongest suit.

The reason we lost yesterday was mainly down to us being utterly bullied in the forwards. Fev were up for it and we couldn't match them. Well done Fev.

I rarely post in the immediate aftermath of games so have had time to digest yesterday's performance. It sort of summed up our progress all season. We can be flat track bullies occasionally but in the most part this squad lacks the moral fibre to compete when the going gets tough. That said I have faith in Smith to turn it around in the long term.

Every time we've lost this year, we've struggled up front. As soon as I saw the team sheet (including interchanges) that showed we were going with 2 props & 6 2nd rowers rather than 4 props & 4 2nd rowers we were in for a tough afternoon.

Halfbacks can sometimes create from behind a beaten pack, but up until 4weeks ago we didn't have any halfbacks and since then they are trying to get to know each others plays. When pressure was applied, they couldn't get us out of trouble as they haven't had enough time together yet.

Credit to Fev, they were organised & focussed, did the little things well & applied pressure in the right areas of the field.

Our 2 props used up all their energy in defence and had little left in the tank for go-forward.

Rohan has started re-balancing the squad and I'm confident he will continue to do so.

We have wasted 2years though. Someone in senior management needs to take a good look at whats gone on.

Can't help but suspect that easing obrien out of gametime is to soften us up for the club selling him to help make up shortfall in funding. With lumb and u19s hooker promoted next year we have cover and he's only saleable player under contract that would bring a reasonable amount.

Well two people were responsible for a lot of the failed recruitment. Lowes and Ferres. One fell on his sword. Not sure who should hold the majority of the blame.

Like you I've seen us struggle up front increasingly this season. That's despite us signing a lot of props. Trouble is most of them were poor quality. In the backrow we lack aggression and toughness. Bulls and Northern sides of old have had their faults but they were built on forward power - nobody ever took liberties with the Bradford pack. Unfortunately that's not been the case for about 3 years. Peter Fox used to get criticism for being a forwards orientated coach but his retort was that forwards are what a team is based on and you can't get away from that. We struggled against anyone with a pack willing to front up this year. The big priority for next year is carefully recruit some forwards with the right attitude who can give us the kind of platform that Fev got yesterday or Batley have had.

It needn't cost the earth - it just needs someone to identify players that knows what they're doing.

On OB I hope we don't need to cash in on him as he's a decent player and has got plenty of improvement in him.

Who would buy O'Brien though super league sides had chance of getting him for nothing but none wanted to take that option.

Seem to remember Leeds being keen. Difference then was Adam wanted to remain at club and club wanted to keep him, so he signed a new deal. Think there be takers if he was available and he may want out if he sees his potential gametime being limited under smith.

He has been our best and most consistent player for two years now. What team leaves out their best player/first choice hooker, regardless of the game? Roby is a small player but would Saints leave him out? So what if he's not a massive bloke, he tackles four times his weight anyway. Yes we might still have lost but he would've put up more of a fight then a)an out of position Addy who has signed for Hull KR and has been poor for weeks and B)a stop-gap loanee snail from Warrington who was brought in to cover an injury.

Howarth is from Wakefield. But the point remains, as well as adding that Howarth seems so slow that the referee may as well not bother taking the defence back 10, as they make it up again by the time the ball hits the receiver anyway.

I said it at the time, he would have ended up at Fax if they could have sorted the contract out but struggled to offload players to free up money. I know most Bulls fans probably are struggling to face facts and I too wouldnt believe a player you think is good enough for SL could be lost to a rival but thats just an indication of where the Bulls are at the minute.

No he wasn't.

And the responses you got then, i.e he's a full time player with intentions of staying full time, hold true now. That's not about Bradford or Halifax, that's about him and his conception of his own career.

Do try harder.

Sorry, but if Gaskell and Addy can get SL contracts I would find it hard to believe OB couldn't.

And the responses are going to be just as funny this time around. Never ceases to amaze me just how out of touch with reality some Bulls fans still are.

With the specifics of the player's already stated goals? At the risk of encouraging you into making a lie of your previous claims that you're not on the wind up, which bit did I get wrong?

The conversation probably went something like:

Halifax - "Adam, are you available"
Adam - "I dunno, what can you offer? I need full time as a minimum and a raise would be good?"
Halifax - "We'll get back to you"
Halifax - "Sorry Adam, we've tried, computer says no."

If full time could have been offered then it would have been interesting to see the outcome (especially OBs take on our future) but it's kind of a moot point now isn't it?