You're just copying the esteemed chairman of the PFU there pal.









1/10 =#FF4000MUST TRY HARDER

Interesting piece by Dave Craven in the YP

[urlhttp://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/Peacock-sure-Rhinos-will-be.6539544.jp[/url

Interesting to see a Journo formally suggesting that McGuire's injury happened before he grabbed Carmont?

Doubly interesting to hear what Peacock says about Riddell & Leuluai and suddenly what Bluey said straight after the game in the Sky interview comes into some context for me! I suggested in an earlier post that maybe Bluey had not fully understood what players were telling him after the game about what happened when Danny was still on the ground and that sort of makes sense to me now, players not happy about what happened after the event and Bluey thinking that maybe there was some off the ball foul, but maybe they were upset about the 'treatment' Danny was getting while clearly being injured on the deck!

The way I saw it it looked loke McGuires leg struck Carmonts studs as he was chasing back, that caused McGuire to fall at which point he grabbed Carmont's shirt. Not sure whether that caused the injury or whether that happened when falling.

Much as I would have been happy for McGuire to pull a Magnum .44 out of his shorts & blast Carmonts head all over pieland, from my watching it looked a 100% deliberate pull back. I have not seen it since the falling over explanation came out.

There's an angle from behind the posts where the Leeds fans were sat which seems to show both men running, McGuire slightly behind Carmont with his arm out holding on to Carmont's jersey. McGuire then stumbles and falls, grabbing onto the back of Carmont and bringing him down in the process.

Not sure at what point in all that the injury occured or what McGuire's thought process was, but from that angle it's a pretty innocuous looking fall and a tangle of bodies.

To be fair I agree, which is why I find it interesting that a Journo has brought it up and offered it as an explanation!

If you listen to the Bulls fans DC is a staunch Leeds supporter, which might explain that one.

Well he writes for the YP, so would expect a Yorkshire leaning (& possibly Leeds) in any report he does but he has stuck his neck out there a little!

Good effort.

But if someone with teh photoshop skillz can put Sam Tomkins, hand on knee, on the other half of the sofa then it becomes A++.

Applause

Bluey speaks out! : www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html

Bluey speaks out! : www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html

Quote ="RhinoNeil"Bluey speaks out! : www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html'" Needs to keep his mouth shut IMO, said enough controversial things himself this year.

Quote ="RhinoNeil"Bluey speaks out! : www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html'" Needs to keep his mouth shut IMO, said enough controversial things himself this year.

Quote ="RhinoNeil"Bluey speaks out! : www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html'" More misplaced chelping and lack of rational leadership focus from an increasingly embarrassing coach ahead of the most important fixture of the season. The only surprise being that he hasn't yet set up a Twitter account to make a complete twit of himself on there too. He seriously needs to STFU. All in stark contrast to the more professional approach of the Wigan coach who has maintained a dignified silence. I do hope the rumours I've heard regarding his early departure and release from the one year contract extension are true. His time is up. Phil Clarke by plenty.

Quote ="RhinoNeil"Bluey speaks out! : www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html'" More misplaced chelping and lack of rational leadership focus from an increasingly embarrassing coach ahead of the most important fixture of the season. The only surprise being that he hasn't yet set up a Twitter account to make a complete twit of himself on there too. He seriously needs to STFU. All in stark contrast to the more professional approach of the Wigan coach who has maintained a dignified silence. I do hope the rumours I've heard regarding his early departure and release from the one year contract extension are true. His time is up. Phil Clarke by plenty.

There was a poster on here, AP, who thought the sun shone out of Bluey's arris when Leeds appointed him.

I think I would edge towards your opinion more than his these days.

Not that I disagree that the Leeds coach would be best keeping quiet on these things, but

McLennan's comments in full:

"They are tasteless comments which really disappoint our club, I'm not impressed. I don't really need to say much to stick up for Danny McGuire because his deeds throughout his career speak for themselves. I defy you to go to any player in Super League and say that Danny McGuire is a dirty or cheating player. It's disappointing that he's come out of that major operation on Friday and his family have informed him that this has been written about him. We won't be using that as motivation, We don't get motivated by negative things. What we're motivated by is a desire to do well for each other and for Maggsy and Jamie Peacock."

Not exactly controversial this time. The worst he did was call Clarke's comments tasteless, which is not incorrect.

Well done McLennan for sticking up for his players.

Poor attempt at stirring there

Anyone that bother's to read the article will see there's nothing controversial in what McClennan says there - and I have little doubt he was asked a direct question about Clarke by the Journo that also wrote the article as "McClennan hits out"

McClennan says the team aren't motivated by negative things but all the same I'm sure it's doing no harm in creating a siege mentality.

I'm beginning to think Leeds could have handled this better. At least leave this sort of thing to GH who has experience of such matters with his various spats with Caisley and Hood.

Why would Michael Mcguire comment on something Phil Clarke said about Danny Mcguire?

I just like to draw attention my dignified silence on the relative morality of the bombing of Dresden and other things i had no vested interest in.

Sinfield's turn to chelp away at detractors [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/super_league/leeds/9017390.stmhere[/url

Not sure that "well tough" as a barb aimed at Leeds's detractors qualifies as 'chelping' or 'hitting out at detractors' all good for publicity

As for Phil Clarke's comments...just plain small minded and silly, not really worth getting too steamed up about IMHO

Michael Maguire (as opposed to Michael McGuire) hasn't commented on Danny McGuire (as opposed to Danny Maguire) either.

Please do try to contextually keep up.