Radford had his man pinned to the floor defenseless, while swinging jack hammer blows to his head. I'm sorry but there is a big difference. I don't care if it was bailey's fault or not, the fact of the matter was that you cannot do things like that in rugby league. You have no argument

Wellens, at least had the guy looking at him, and gave him a clip back after he recieved one. Wellens "punch" could hardly be called a punch.

Leeds are the RFLs "poster boys". Of course the refs are going to be biased towards them

Ignoring the Myler incident, because sometimes you miss things like knock-ons and forward passes, but the Tickle incident is another DIRECT example of inconsistency. It's the same thing, if not worse as it was longer and closer to the line. In fact, one of the players flopped. Not only did they not get a card (like Tickle) but we didn't even get a penalty.

Oh FFS. Pathetic

Not only did Radford not have him pinned to the floor, he never give him a jack hammer blow. Uppercuts. Don't exaggerate, you'll be saying he ate his babies next!

If someone is prepared to throw an elbow, they should be prepared to receive something back. He wasn't defenceless in the slightest. He just didn't defend himself. There's a difference.

He was on his hands and knees preparing to play the ball. Radford steams in with punches. I have no idea how you can be any less defenceless.

He was on his hands and knees, so he could have tucked his head in (like he did) and cover up with his arms. That's called defending yourself in a fight.

To be defenceless, he's need to be held back by someone, kind of like he waited for Lee Radford to be before he attempted to attack him.

Defenceless? Or just stupid? If you elbow someone in the head multiple times, you should be prepared to get some back!

The stupid one in that exchange was Lee Radford for taking the bait. If he keeps his cool (and let's face it, a player with that level of experience should be able to) he stays on the field.

Top Thread.
For such a poor player opposing fans do go on and on about him enough!!

There wasn't just one stupid person in that exchange.

Did you see Bailey letting his teammates down?

Keep digging pal.

If you think a fight is fair when one of the participants is on his hands and knees then you want your head examining.

The only stupid person this evening is Lee Radford for losing his temper, getting himself sent off, and losing Hull the match. Simple.

Good thread this. If you watch the game closely Radford was about to be penalised for holding down when he lost it. Bailey is entitled to regain his feet. Radford should roll away when the ref calls held.

Applaud the idiot all you like but he cost his team any chance of a win, 4th spot in the league and an extra life in the playoffs and given how kakk Hull are against the big boys an extra life is something they desperately needed. Radford was a fool and Bailey old manned him.

Meantime Bailey finished the game, taking Leeds forward to victory whilst Radford sat in the stand watching Hull trduge off to yet another predictable defeat at the hands of the Rhinos.

Bailey had just been tackled by another hull player. How in the hell was he not pinned to the floor. There is a big difference between a jack hammer blow and an uppercut. Are you an idiot troll?

This thread is hilarious,
From what i remember of the incident, Bailey was trying to get up and swinging his arm, at the time, i bet none of you saw him connecting with the elbows, as why would Radford of stayed on the floor holding onto his legs while Bailey had time to elbow him 4 times? Surely he would of rolled away at least after the 2nd? From what i remember, you can't see a proper angle on it to see that all the elbow's were connecting, or if one or two were.
Radford should of rolled away, the poster that said he was the dominant tackler should watch it again, he clearly wasn't. Bailey was doing what every rugby player does, trying to get up for a quick play the ball.
Don't believe Bailey did much wrong, he wouldn't of seen Radford beneath him while he was doing it, the way most of you lot write about it makes it sounds like Bailey was eyeing the back of Radford's head, and elbowed him while eyeing his target. His eyes were facing forward, or if i guess they were probably closed while he was trying to get up.
The idiots on this thread is quite amusing actually. Only a few on here with sense^^

While this is a bit of a troll, I'll respond a bit.
Shouldn't you be slightly concerned that Leeds only won by 4 points against a team that was a man down for 70 mins and is by your own admission 'kakk against the big boys'?

1. The player that tackled Bailey was Lee Radford. So how can he pin him down AND throw punches?
2. Yes, there is a big difference between a jack hammer blow and an uppercut. Jack hammers impact downwards and uppercuts impact upwards. Which one happened here?

Seriously, you'll be saying he stamped on him next.

Why should Leeds come out of second gear against woeful sides such as Hull FC?

As I suspected.

As for those saying it lost us the game, there is no evidence of that. We turned up our game when Radford got sent off. For all we know, we could have been worse with him on (we have been before!).

Danny McGuire aside (who is in great form), Leeds didn't deserve that win and they must be a bit worried going into the play-offs that they only managed to beat a side with 12 men by four points. A repeat game in the play-offs would be an interesting encounter!

So if Leeds didn't deserve to win, you are claiming that Hull FC deserved to win. How could you possibly justify such an opinon?! Hull were rubbish, Leeds threw away numerous chances and were barely threatened in the end. Fine, they lost the first half, but they were always going to win after 10 minutes of the second IMO.

Yes, I do think Hull deserved to win. I think they were the better side. I thought they played better as a team and every individual in a black and white shirt played better than every individual in a blue and amber shirt (with the exception of McGuire). The handicap of having one less player on the pitch was just too much in the end.

Leeds threw away numerous chances - are you suggesting that that means Hull didn't? To say that Hull (with one less man on the field) were rubbish is ridiculous. How do you keep the SL champions to 4 points with one less player on the field whilst playing rubbish? I had horrible flashbacks of 2005 against Bradford when the red card came out, I thought we were going to cave. Fortunately, it was more like GB vs Aus in 2003, where it motivated us more.

If I was a Hull fan I would be slightly concerned that my near-full strength team couldn't beat an injury hit side who have just come off a hammering in a cup final AND was 12-0 up AT HOME

Seriously your obsession with all things Hull is getting pathetic now. Give it up and concentrate on the complete joke of a club you support instead.