For me injuries permitting my 17 would be.
Webb
Bjb
Watkins
Hardaker
Hall
Mcguire
Burrow
Bailey
Mcshane
Peacock
Jjb
Ablett
Sinfield

Moore
Griffin
Leuleui
Delaney

I really do rate Clarkson but if he's not a starter i don't think he's s ub and in this case i think the other 3 are in front of him.
Also i think it's time Moore got a chance and Bailey is capable of doing a stint in the BR.
The 9 selection is as i see it Mcshane deserves to start and should be given ample time to establish himself.
Aslo should we lose an outside back then Delaney and Ablett should be able to adjust.

What has McShane shown to deserve to start?

I personally would not start Bailey he is great defensive prop but you need some impact early doors and neither Peacock nor Bailey give that - I would start Griffin and I would play Moore before Leuluai.

Playing Burrow, McShane and McGuire is suicide defensively - this is not Wakey their playing. This may just be a training run for Manly but they will still be a serious side.

Well McShane hasn't been given time to show anything but Burrow in all his time has shown he isn't a starting Hooker, I wouldn't start Griffin because he can make huge impact from the bench & it seems McGuire only wants to tackle when Grand Final time comes around.

If we have awarded him the 9 shirt and a long contract how long should/do we wait before giving him a start?
He has to learn and integrate with the team.
Plus our Coach was clear about selections on pre-season form and Mcshane earned his chance imo.
Burrow starting at 9 hasn't worked imo and in all honesty i think he'll start so for me it's at 7.
As for the defence they all need to improve on last night which i think they will.
Fair points about the Props but i would still select them all rather than another BR/Back.

Was he given the 9 shirt because of lack of competition for the place or because they saw him as the 9 for the future? If Leeds could have signed a suitable replacement for Buderus they would have which suggest McShane isn't really the one.

Signing young players on long contracts is just a way of GH getting the players on the cheap in the main not a cast iron indication of the future importance to the club.

So with McShane not deemed worthy, and Burrow having been proved not to be a suitable 9 to start the match, who would you go with Sal?

Personally, I'd line up like this, but I don't for a minute expect us to.

Webb
BJB
Watkins
Hardaker
Hall
McGuire
Burrow
Griffin
Sinfield
Peacock
JJB
Ablett
Clarkson

Delaney
Bailey
Moore
Leuluai

I would play a safety first game in the opening 30 mins, no silly offloads, and (hopefully) a seriously improved kicking game. Sinfield has played 9 for England and looked very good in the role, he's quick enough to play there and it gives us a chance to have McGuire and Burrow both back in the positions they should be playing in.

This is going to be brutal defensively, so we need the big hitters on the pitch / bench to deal with this.

I like the look of that BR Sinfield was effective at 9 in the 4N.
Sal i disagree re-long term deals and shirt no's i think the club wanted the kid tied down and see/saw him as the future 9 and like i said the Coach himself made a point of pre-season form and Mcshane for me was one of the "lads bang in form" so deserves a go imo.

Good luck for next week guys, have a brilliant night!!

Cheers WP.

Good luck for next week, really hope you can turn Manly over.

I'd personally go radical with this line up, injuries permitting.

Webb
Hall
Watkins
Hardaker
Smith
Ward
McGuire
Peacock
Sinfield
Griffin
JJB
Delaney
Clarkson

Bailey
Burrows
Ablett
Hauraki

Thankyou

So how do explain with McShane being 'Bang in form' McDermott not starting him against Hull KR and then not even including him in the 18 for the following week. To me it suggests a lack of confidence in his ability at this level.

Sinfield cannot play 9 - he will not be able to control the attack!! although he will have his hands on the ball for all 6 plays rather than his usual 4 out of 6.

On the hooker Burrow is the lesser of two evils and not having a nine of the requisite quality will be costly. We must not overplay the influence of Buderus!!

He was included in the 18 the previous week. He was on the bench. Didnt get on but was on the bench

So why give him the no.9 shirt...AND a FOUR year contract ??

That is damn unfair on the lad....he could be playing for a different club now if he isn't considered good enough at Headingley.

As others have stated (DHM ?) McShane was looking pretty good when given a few matches on the run last season. Indeed some stated he could be the new K.Cunningham !! He was then very much out of favour and could even be suffering a continued personal vendetta. Why select him for the bench and then leave him there ? Cannot be doing much for his confidence.

I certainly wouldn't have Burrows playing



I'd go:

BJB
Hall
Watkins
Hardaker
Chisholm
Webb
McGuire
Bailey
McShane/Hood
Peacock
JJB
Delaney
Sinfield

Burrow
Griffin
Ablett
Amor...oops ! Sorry Moore/Lleulai

Smith
Clarkson

I am always considered a little reckless at work too

.....BUT I [udo[/u get results !!!

If Leeds could have signed a suitable replacement for Buderus McShane would not have got the 9 shirt. Given the squad who else could you give the 9 shirt to?

On a 4 year contract - a cheap way of paying him i.e. lower wages for a longer contract!!

The new KC - who said that

So you would choose this game to give Chisholm his debut!! I appreciate it is a friendly but even in training mode Manly would take him to the cleaners.

I didn't...but I do remember somebody else stating that. As for giving him the no.9 shirt that smacks of cruelty if he was not considered worthy of it....why not then have given it to Hood ?

More pertinently if he wasn't considered worthy enough to step up why the heck let Buderus leave ...when he stated he was prepared to stay ?

The most relevant point is that effectively yes this is a friendly.

I did say I was considered reckless......but if Chisholm is really not good enough for a first team squad number then again why give it to him ? This game might be the making of him: there is nothing really at stake here.

They had little really choice with Buderus - once Bennett went to Newcastle Buderus was off.

Hood is even less ready the McShane - potentially Hood is the better prospect IMO

Well if both Smith and Watkins are unavailable he might get a go - although I think both Matai and Lyon could wreck his confidence.

The public position was that Leeds had a player with an existing playing contract for 2012 and a player who entirely appreciated the difficult position he had put the club in by asking for a release and if the release couldn't be granted he would honour that commitment.

Do you know any different?

If a player wants to leave which Buderus did there is no future keeping them regardless of contract - the club is no respecter of contracts so you can hardly expect the players to be different. Buderus didn't want to be at Leeds if he did he would never have asked for a release?