I'm more than happy to take the two points but I really hope that winning doesn't paper over the work that still needs to be done. For 60 minutes we were completely out played. However, I hope that I'm not the only one that can see (Brian Mc) that the way forward is Watkins and Jones-Bishop for the rest of the season.

I hope we can build on this.

We played well for 15 minutes. We let in 3 soft tries to kicks, which should be worked on, two of which when we were down to 12 men. We won 32-16 when playing 13 vs 13, and this against a Bradford performance the Sky commentators were creaming about.

Positives: Lauititi and Webb both looking sharper than last year already. Buderus had good go-forward all game (and will be helped by the new ptb policing). Burrow excelled in the second half, and BJB and Watkins looked bright.

Negatives: Our collection of mediocre not-quite-props and second-rows. Kirke, Burgess and Pitts are definitely included in this group, Ablett and Jones-Buchanon are regressing towards it.

I agree, we seemed to have stopped the back chat, but still giving away far too many penalties, the defence looked very shaky for a majority of the game. Also, the Watkins BJB partnership looks very exciting! Neither of them looked out of place and they are both a real threat with their pace. They both look to have huge futures at the club!

Think Ablett has done enough in the past to prove he can be a very useful player. Burgess is no game changer but don't think he lost the ball once in the match, which is a step in the right direction. I agree about Kirke and Pitts though; Bailey and Clarke are a huge improvement over these two imo.

I don't agree with saying we only went behind because we were down to 12. Delaney got binned for a professional foul (interesting compare and contrast to the Raynor/BJB situation). If he had stayed on the pitch (ie not taken the bulls player out), then we'd have conceded at least 1 try anyway

Disagree entirely. Ganson would not have given the try. Cheating bar steward.

I agree with all of that.

I agree and hope watkins continues at centre. Delaney would be better in back row than the likes of kirke. Pitts was disapointing. I thought he looked good in pre season but just looked lost. And kirke in pre season seemed to have more go forward but didn't have any go forward or ofloading at all

Very average performance for 65minutes imo and we forced the pass that was'nt on far too many times.
Positives i agree with the above re-Watkins and Bjb and tbf i thought Burgess ran hard but no communication in Defence for kicks and Senior,Jjb ,Pitts and Kirke were not good enough imo.
Still lets not get carried away 1st game in 18 pts down and we came back and won plenty to work on and the likes of Hauraki ,Smith ,and the long term injured to return.

No mention at all of Cross. Forwards still lacking go-forward, poor defence at times and centre needs to be sorted out sooner rather than later.

Watkins in. He was in our top 3 players today, tackled like a trojan as well, including putting Disko on his 'arris



Delaney would be far better in the 2nd row than Pitts, who IMO looks too small. Was Lee Smith injured today or just not selected?

Oh and another thought, Jones Bishop looks class. Would like to see him backing up around the middle a bit more, especially when the quick play the balls are on. Great composure for the last try, but I feel his talents are going to be slightly wasted on the wing.

He's not going to stay on the wing long-term. The question is does he look to be a better bet on the wing than Lee Smith - at least for this year.

I think Smith is a very talented player, but given the increasing propensity of teams like Wigan and Wire to score so many of their points by kicking high to the corners and have their giant, specifically trained, wingers leap up to catch and score, the days of having 5'10'' wingers like Lee Smith defend such ploys could be numbered. On those terms, Jones-Bishop is a better bet. It doesn't harm that he's also quite a bit faster than Smith.

There's obviously a wider point there as to whether except for 1,6,7 and 9 every Rugby League player is becoming more and more physically similar and interchangable, but Smith's most viable positions are currently probably fullback or halfback.

Having said that: even if he isn't in our first-choice 3/4 line he'd still get 15 games a season such are the inevitability of injuries in the modern game.

I've not been on here since last season - and i know none of you will be glad to see me back.

I'd just like to say though, although we played better for alot of the game, you showed that you still have that quality throughout the squad which shone through in the last 20 minutes. You lot will still be contenders this year imo.

Your supporters were superb today too - really got behind your lads in the last 20. It's clear there are plenty of Leeds supporters who are a credit to your club as I had a couple of people saying how we didn't deserve to lose and also how we could be back up there this season.

Cracking match - lets hope for 2 more later in the year.

I would have to dissagree with a few comments.

Personally I thought Pitts was very good, and certainly looked the pick of the backrowers.

I also thought our props, despite not been outstanding, did their jobs very well and probably followed to the letter what was instructed of them.

Kirke was a waste of a player, I would agree with that one, but I wouldn't put him in the prop category anyway.

Our major weakness was the centre positions, which were both very poor defensively. Watkins coming on changed it a lot, and I am in agreement with the majority that the partnership with BJB looked extremely promising. We also looked weak at halback in the first half, which hopefully was just a first game scenario because it did improve a lot second half.

I'll have a go:

He was poor. Calling a spade a spade. He settled down in the 2nd half. But his first stint he couldn't cope with the speed. He struggled in defence, to get back etc.

But hopefully he will settle down sooner rather than later and offer a no frills approach, I eman that in a good way.

Biff was easily our best prop yesterday.

Got to say Gotcha i thought Pitts was pretty quiet and was at fault for Diskos try when he turned his back on the ptb.
I like him and think he'll add to our squad the more he plays and would have him in ahead of Kirke but i just don't think he was at his best (along with others) yesterday.
Fair call re-Props i thought Biffa did well and looked sharper especially in defence grapple aside.

Pitts was naive there. I think we was avoiding contact with Disco, so he didn't give a penalty away. But that would have been the better thing to do!

He also was naive when Senior tackled high on one of the Bradford players, Senior got on with it but Pitts looked back at the ref to see if he would call it, luckily he didn't blow. Other than that I liked the look of him.

For the second rowers I thought Ali and JJB carried alot of tempo. I thought it was good coaching leaving it for the later part of the half when they were brought back on. Brian could have panicked and brought them on too soon and wasted playing the card. That is worth noting, he bided his time and it paid off, just.

Why oh why oh why would anyone pick Delaney over the classy Watkins. Delaney is a Donkey. Like someone just posted, play Delaney in the second row. He is good in defence and his lack of attacking flair wouldn't be a problem there. As the old saying goes "if he's good enough, then he's old enough", so stop baby-sitting Watkins and play him the full 80 mins.

I have to dissagree with that Pitts assessment. He was the only man at the marker area and it was a quick play the ball. What was clear was that Senior did not fill in, and realized it afterwards, and I can't remember who it was infront of the on the ingoal who did not move forward. All which resulted in a massive gap for Diskin to dive into. Infact Pitts was the only one to tackle him.

I'm not saying Pitts should not take some blame for it, but not alone. The rest of his game besides that though for me looked very good. I would be interested in the stats, because maybe I was wrong, but I thought he defended very well.

Brett Delaney is a good signing.

He's a solid, no nonsense type centre who will be absolutely ideal in the second row.

Kirke I think. Stood and watched.

Fair points re-ptb area i just thought it was naive to turn his back on the play and Ali was the stand out BR imo.

Cross shouldn't have started. I said that before the match too.

First sign of weakness from McD for me was the way he set us up. I totally agreed with his choice of 17, but that bench was dire!! I'd have started Burgess & Kirke and had Cross & Ali on the bench.

The problem is, we had no "game changers" on the bench. Kirke, Burgess, Pitts & Watkins. All fine players, even good players. But if the game slips away from you in the first 20 mins (as it did!!!) you're banking on a few of the big guns coming on to stop the rot, had Cross & Ali started on the bench, I think things could've gone differently.

He had our strongest (available) 13 as the 13 that started the match. Which is all well and good if you get off to a flyer, but as a tactic for the opening game of the season, against practically unknown opponents, I think he should've kept something in reserve.