It is....but still think this team can do it. (The Wolves team is just as old don't forget - if not older?). Get to the final and Leeds will win it.

If it doesn't do it then let the re-building begin for 2014; if the team does do it the re-building might just have to wait for yet another year.

Even if they are playing wigan?

Yep. No prob. Leeds have the measure of Wigan. Huddersfield will crumple if they make it to the final.

I think we are a bit battered but wouldn't rule us out. It very much depends on what Warrington side shows up, if they're at A game level with passes and offloads sticking then it's going to be very tough.

Next week is the important one. It's not really looking at it as two games. If Leeds reach final they will have it in them. Where I don't think they will have it in them is next week, too early, too battered.

I will be more confident if Delaney and JJB are out. Playing unfit players is a risk, and half fit these players are not as good as their replacements are.

=#FF0000Sadly, I think you might be right.



=#FF0000Half fit and the decision's a bit of a no-brainer. The real dilemma is where players are perhaps at 90% (not that I'm claiming this is the case for JJB and BD - both looked crocked to me). But under the 90% scenario, should the coach go for experience and possibly higher levels of concentration associated with it, or should he opt for fitness? I'm not sure.

I think we might see JJB in the 17, he was warming up in the 2nd half trying to get on and I reckon with him being such a leader in the group that he'll be given the nod. Delaney sounds like he's done for the season.

Looks like Singleton & Clarkson into the 17 then if neither make it though.

Clearwing- I honestly think if its 90% fitness they play at a guess i'd say most RL players who are carrying knocks play at even 70% strapped up/receiving a pre-match jab.
The big thing for me is the worst case scenario i.e Could Delaney/Jjb be out for the rest of the season if it back-fires thus missing the GF should we get there or is it better to give them the extra week off knowing they'll be less at risk IF we make the GF?
Imho i'd leave both out if less than 70/75% IF it the worse case scenario is possible with the exsisting injury becauise even with both missing i still think we CAN beat whoever we play whereas risking both and it goes t!t$ up we are down 15 and putting more pressure than needed on the team.

This isn't the time of the season to be saving players "just in case" there's a game to play next week.

The call has to be based solely on whether they can get through the game in front of them, without having to hobble off and waste a bench spot and an interchange.

I mostly agree but that "just in case" scenario has an efffect imo on the call to play or not this week if they'll be better off "not risked" rather than turning up to play at 50/60% looking like Mr Bump jabbed up off their t!t$ losing both AGAIN but also losing them for the GF.
I think we have a good chance of winning without them with Singleton and Clarkson to come in admittedly it'll be a lot tougher but so would having both limping out.

I don't think you can risk playing both players, this is where the coach earns his money big selection to make.

I agree that it would be easier to win without jjb and Delaney than with them but losing them mid way through and being rotations down. Given their state, I would probably only take on of them and play Singleton.

Genuine question and apologies if my recollection is off but were you one of the posters earlier in the year who defended McDermott's "innovative" wasting of a bench spot?

Don't think we can risk both JJB and Delaney and potentially lose 2 rotation players. Always been a big fan of ablett but Friday was one of his better games and he seemed to take up the slack of both JJB and Delaney with some good energy and strong drives.
As for kirke, fair play he had a good game, was almost unrecognisable from the player we usually see. Good to see a bit of aggression in both attack and defence in his game

You're not seriously attempting to compare the way a coach uses the four fit interchange players available to him, and selecting an injured player who ends up being a passenger for the rest of the game whether you want to use him or not?

Oh, you are.

So, it was you.

When the coach leaves a fully fit player unused on the bench it's "innovative".

However, now we can't risk "wasting" valuable bench spots.

You're as consistent as a Brian McDermott coached team between Feb and August.

Fog knitting even Gotcha would be proud of.

Yes, you tried but you didn't quite reach Gotcha standards.

So, are bench spots valuable or not?

Another pearler from 'hindsight retort' gilder.

in trying to understand things I don't understand I try to think of logical reasons why. For me, I suggested that leaving a player on the bench could be BMD conditioning his players to cope with a reduced bench. So were it to happen in a big game we would be better prepared. I'd say we coped well in an intense game. There may be something in it, or it could just have been that he's clueless

Don't bring me into something that shows you up.

Otherwise we will also remind everybody that you also wrote Peacock off as finished two years ago, and we're not best pleased when handed his new contract. The same Peacock that has carried this team this year. Oops I just did.

One fine morning next month the world might wake up and realise it was the former, all along. The world except Gotcha, that is...

And if that doesn't happen? What will fake account alias Fetlar be posting as then?

Without JJB and Delaney in the engine room, I'd say it was 50/50. But, in my opinion, Friday night's performance alone was sufficient to prove decisively that your critique of the coach is completely irrational.

Regarding the false account irrationality: don't be coy - just say who you think is my alias. Then hopefully they can prove you're wrong and irrational about that too.

Oh dear