Obviously an emotive diatribe designed to provoke response.

What really matters is not what players " have done "...but what players are potentially able to do in THE FUTURE, for the blue and amber. Nostalgia and gratitude for the past will be your undoing...me old mucker. Foresight is required to best facilitate more success.

You can join me at the next ex-Leeds player's dinner and tell David Ward, Bill Ramsey and a few others how little regard yuo have for deeds done past.

Suffice to say we have a different outlook and I know which one has more value.

How many championships did those players win again?

Which players?

psst, I think he means the ones you named in your posts, and then subsequently in the quote he took from your post. Could be wrong like, but I think that's what he means...

The one's you said. I don't know the answer so was asking.

Perhaps you could ask them to lace up their boots and play for the club again to PROPERLY show your gratitude.

Depends how far you take it really don't ya think ?

By the way David Ward was one of my " heroes " in my youth.....but have grown out of that sort of blind unquestioning reverence for a hooker ( or any other player ) as I have got older. : )

I would generally agree with you as long as there were the backs on the field who could also play in the forwards when needed... But it would depend on the opposition. We certainly could have done with more " beef " ( Ambler ) on the bench at Wembley.

Either option would have been better than having a second ( inferior ) specialist hooker only wasting one of those spots : )

What a bizarre statement.


Obviously not as far as you it would appear.

Unless that hooker is Buderus it would seem.

I take it you're not interested in coming along and telling Mr Ramsey and Mr Ward how little you think of their past deeds?

I'm relatively certain Ramsey won one championship (amongst other honpurs)> Wardy might've done when he was a young un but he certainly won many other honours.

Leeds went out and signed the best hooker they could - I can agree on that.

However if what you are actually suggesting is that Leeds signed the best hooker to play in the same 17 with Diskin - Has anyone ever believed that on here?

Leeds already had a capable 80 minute hooker on their books but struggled to adequately cover the position when he was injured, they added another 80 minute hooker (a better one, IMO.) If they wanted to compliment their exosting hooker why did they undermine his role in the team and wouldn't they have been better looking at say a James Roby or Isaac Luke type of player instead.

The bit that didn't make much sense then and still doesn't today is playing them together in the 17.

Ahem ! No blind reverence for Buderus........he has being a little disppointing.... BUT his skills are still far in excess of your " champion " .....and it's that blind faith which should be challenged in all walks of life.

I do in fact think a great deal about the past deeds of many "stars" from the past but no I wouldn't be particularly bothered about meeting them to fawn over their past exploits....pretty sure the feeling would be mutual unless we had other interests to share. It seems to me they have enough of those idolisers to more than keep them sufficiently happy.... Me old mucker.

Quite right. We have to run with the squad we have for now. I have been an appreciative Diskin fan since he came into the side but the double hooker selection has not worked well for Leeds as none of ours are impact players.

With the lack of JP & Biffa we are down on the go forward aspect of our game that is crucial if our talented backs are to perform. Therefore we have to pick the best hooker which on current form is Buderus and play Ambler to help put us on the front foot. Sure Buderus had an offday at Wembley but on the other hand has put in some outstanding performances and is capable of match winning performances which you cannot say of Diskin this year. This is not a vote of no confidence in Diskin but purely selecting a side to beat Wigan in this next match.

Buderus could have a short break either side of half time if necessary and we have Burrow and Sinfield to cover the distribution for this time.

The loss of JP has highlighted the weaknesses in our forwards. Assuming JJB & Clarkson will be fit to start against Wigan we have to choose a bench from Eastwood, Diskin, Ali, Kirke, Ambler & Ablett. For me the strongest would be Eastwood, Ambler, Ablett and Ali (if fit) If Ali is not fit then I would play Diskin ahead of Kirke but as an interchange 2nd row and not restrict game time for Buderus.

They both played in 2 Championship Finals for Leeds. And although their careers overlapped they didn't play in the same Final team.

Ramsey's were at the end of the 1968/69 (W) and 1969/70 (L) seasons.

Ward's were at the end of the 1971/72 (W) and 1972/73 (L) seasons.

Maybe Gareth will at last accept he is wrong now that his self proclaimed nemesis has nailed colours to the mast ??

Agree with your first choice bench wholeheartedly....BUT would Diskin ?? His feelings are obviously paramount as far as the head coach is concerned.

What would be the average number of injuries (games missed) for a player in SL?



Which, according to the YEP match report at The Stoop last season would be incorrect:

=#FF000020th June 2009
Webb shines as Quins are crushed
Harlequins RL 14 Leeds Rhinos 48 Engage Super League Round 17

=#800000Leeds' pivots were on song, Webb, halves Danny McGuire and Rob Burrow, hooker Danny Buderus and loose-forward skipper Kevin Sinfield all having big games. With Matt Diskin a late withdrawal due to injury Buderus played the full 80 and bagged his first try for the club when he arrowed in from dummy-half on 54 minutes.

Looking at some interesting snippets from the match report:

=#800000Buderus had his best game since joining Leeds at the start of this season and he capped it with his first try for the club. After Leeds ran a penalty in front of the posts, Jones-Buchanan was hauled down just short and Buderus plunged over from acting-half, with his skipper maintaining a 100 per cent kicking record.

Getting the gig all to himself, he had his best game for the club - coincidence?

=#800000Buderus, Sinfield and Burrow carved out a try well-taken by Jones-Buchanan on 37 minutes, then Sinfield booted a penalty on the hooter.

Not only able to play the full game/half but make a notable contribution 3 minutes before the break.



Does that make it right? Perhaps, perhaps not.

Without allowing Buderus the opportunity to prove his worth over 80 minutes more often it's difficult to say.



Danny Buderus and Matt Diskin sharing the hooking role over 80 minutes is the elephant in the room, when Leeds have a fullish squad to select from.



I'm pretty sure that's not how it works. Even though many of the themes contained in that post chime with the G(reat) 1's view.

You ARE the master of diplomacy. Give me old mucker my regards if you ever meet him.

Aah the typical southstander post. Forget what a lot of well educated, ex professional rugby players/followers think and blindly stick our heads in the sand and back what the coaches say.

Coaches never get things wrong now do they?

This debate will rumble on and on. Most likely into next season now we know both players will be here for 2011.

The thing is when you are being spelled you dont have chance to get into the game and any sort of consistent form. It's no coincidence that both Diskin and Buderus' form is at it's best when the other is not involved.

Therefore if enough other players are available one has to be left out. However we both know the coach will not do it. Why, is anybodys guess because it simply does not work!

Too many posts to play with, what’s gone wrong with this thread, serious and informed debate without any sidetracking, name-calling or nonsense?



Of course they did, as I keep explaining, and by consistently selecting both in the 17 and using a rotation policy they are proving that. And by signing Buderus for another 12 months, its going to continue until the end of next season.



Yes they did, and they seriously unsettled Diskin by doing so. But clearly they thought they could gain a competitive advantage by rotating 2 of the best. There is plenty of logic in that approach as the workload for a modern hooker/dummy half is immense. With hindsight, this approach failed in 2009 with no Buderus available and has only shown glimpses of its potential in 2010 (there is still time ...) but, at the risk of going round in circles, its going to happen again next year.



That’s your job, we pose the questions, you answer them.





Outstanding, how on earth do you find this stuff. So, I retract “not played 80 minutes” and replace it with “only done it once in 2 years”. Hardly shows that Leeds are confident in him doing it regularly, given it only happened when Diskin was taken ill at short notice, and the club went straight back into rotation until Buderus broke his leg.



It is, and that elephant is staying there for another season, that much is clear. Which I happen to think makes all the theories of alternate selections proposed regularly on here irrelevant just as Al Rhino states above.

I wonder what the 2 players involved would say? They are both trying to make it work, Diskin was clearly miffed by the signing of Buderus (and the allocation of his No 9 shirt which was poor management), and probably remains frustrated if his dugout tantrum when subbed against Catalans is anything to go by. Nevertheless he reverted to type and performed admirably at the end of 2009 helping to claim yet another championship. Furthermore, he is likely to remain the incumbant number 9 at the club when 2012 begins, despite the eagerness of so many to unfairly belittle and write him off.

Buderus is obviously happy to play in the rotation system because he signed knowing that was the role, and extended his contract on the same basis. If he thought his body or performances at the end of his career were suitable to an 80 minute role would he not have found a club to accomodate that? From a Leeds perspective he still has lots to prove in Blue and Amber and he will likely get 40-50 minutes a game to do so.

Who knows, maybe the injection of some new coaching blood next year might be the spark needed to make this part of the McClennan masterplan fire on all cylinders?

I hope so....it does look like we're stuck with it.

However, if my vehicle had taken as long as this to "fire on all cylinders" hoping one day it would spark, I think I might have given in and replaced it long before now.

You lost the argument there.

Whereas you've rendered all arguments null and void by declaring blind faith in the coaching team.

Hi dumbo.

Just go back and read what I compared the coaching team against to reach my conclusion.