That's a bit of a harsh judgement based on one game. His form last season (including the GF) and in the early part of this season suggest Leeds would have been well-served keeping him.

As well as the other players already mentioned, Lauitiiti's stats are pretty poor for one of our elite players. Not much of an impact from the bench from him.

AS I saw it we didn't seem to go down the left hand side too much, after Keith's initial knockons he didn't seem to get presented the ball much in a position where he could run at his opposite number.

Considering that he has been one of our best attacking options this season that, to me, was surprising.

donald has ability but sinfield, by implication, doesn't ?!?!

bang goes your credibility

like tad said, how do we ever win a game with such rubbish as Sinfield and Diskin in the team .... especially as these "mediocre" players have been a mainstay over 5 years

the monday morning quarterbacks on southstander have spoken again

:2l2qcns7

I know of one poster who does, who this week stated that: [url=viewtopic.php?t=421276&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=75[i:2l2qcns7'He's simply not been the dominant force in the whole league that he was under Smith's stewardship.'
[/i
I wouldn't personally go that far but I think Sinfield has made the very most of his abilities.

I said before the game started that generally Senior & Gleeson nullify each other.
That's what happened on Friday night plus of course Senior's inability to hang on to the ball in 3 very good attacking positions, probably due to Gleeson's attention.

Absolutely.

Lance Todd Trophy Winner, Man of the Match in a WCC win, shortlisted for Man of Steel at least twice.

Not to mention captaining his side to 3 Championships.

If that doesn't equate to a great (not good) player than what does?

Its' harsh to evaluate any player greatness based upon success at international level because, frankly, we haven't had any for almost 40 years.

Sinfield has attained many international honours. He hasn't shone in those games. Doesn't mean he isn't a great. How many international caps did John Holmes earn? Was about 15 wasn't it? Much less than Sinfield I'd guess.

IMO, I'd build a GB/England team around him. International coaches haven't. He's been in and out of the side, on the bench, at hooker, at scrum half, at stand off and at loose forward. Noble didn't rate him. Is it Sinfield's fault Iestyn Harris was handed an opportunity to represent his country in the 2004 tri nations ahead of Sinfield?

I'd agree with that.

As for the talk about Sinfield being better under Smith than McClennan (or vice versa), I don't think I've noticed a massive difference to be honest. I can remember him having very good and bad games under both.

To be honest the skewed comparisons on this board between Smith and McClennan are beginning to get a bit tedious. From my perspective neither is clearly ahead, both have their positives (Smith as a technical coach and McClennan as a motivator) and negatives (discipline under McClennan and overplay under Smith, both making questionable team selections at times). Perhaps when (if) McClennan has served 4 seasons at the club we'll be able to finally put this issue to bed, but at present I suspect neither side of the debate has sufficient evidence to change the minds of the opposing group.

Has the search party found Scott Donald's backside yet, or has Pat Richards handed it back to him? Some of his attempts at taking down the bigger man one on one are like watching Under 11s, all shirt grabbing and flapping arms.

At the minute I'd rather have Ambler, Pitts, Bailey on one leg, anyone rather than Leuluai in the 17. I don't recall ever seeing such a workshy front rower - even some of the bad ones Leeds have had over the last 30 years didn't hide as much as he does on attack.

On a positive note Donald went in for try number 5, in his last 5 games and I thought Kylie in defence put a good couple of bell ringers in.

I don't understand Donald's "tackle efficiency" stats.

he made 5 tackles, when it should have been 9. aka 54% success

whats not to understand ?

To the poster comparing Sinfield with Dave Heron 'off the booze and training 5 days a week'....as someone who has seen both in their prime I think Heron had more natural ability than the current Leeds skipper.

Heron's mis-fortune was to be thrown into a test debut against the greatest team of all-time ('82 Roos) and therefore his GB career amounted to one sub's appearance and one start.

Heron was a stand-out figure in an often modest Leeds team over a period of 15 years (scoring many wonderful long-distance tries among his 94) then gave Bradford tremendous service under Peter Fox. He was still playing for Bramley at 40 so he didn't do so bad 'on the booze' did he ?

Sinfield is a consummate professional who has made the absolute best of his talents, an outstanding goalkicker, admirable captain who would probably rate 7/8 out of 10 right across the board in all the disciplines of being a top pro'.

He just lacks an 'x' factor, for me, and has shown a reluctance to take the line on. Takes the kicking option just too often for my liking and I wouldn't be surprised if he takes the Union ticket eventually, though I hope not.

Yet I tip my hat to the man who has skippered Leeds to three titles.

As loose-forwards, though, neither Heron nor Sinfield can compare to the superb Mick Crane, a legend on and off the park

You don't watch Leeds often do you?

Yes, but lets just say he divides opinion.

Sinfield is a player that makes the absolute best of his ability, if other British players did this we may of had a few series wins against the Aussies over the last 40 years.

Completely agree.

Can I trot out my old story about the March brothers and another young player who signed for Wakey, at the time I was scouting for them.

These 3 players stated how they disliked Kevin Sinfield. And remember this was at a young age, before any of them got close to first team duties.

They disliked him because he took everything so seriously, that he did not drink, and that everybody always fawned over him.

They took the out Sinny because he was too focused on a goal. That goal was to captain Leeds, win trophies, and then represent his country.

Whats the difference in achievements between those players.

Well you didn't pick up on me because I played with the March's for the county for a few years, It's your fault GB failed



Who was the other player?

Sinfield didn't have you scouting him.

Spot on. Let's look at a previous Leeds captain who clearly had much more natural ability than Sinfield and most others of his generation. Imagine what he (and GB) could've done had Schofield shown the same attitude as Sinfield rather than pi55 it all away!

I cant remember his name to be honest. But he went by the wayside and went back playing for Lock Lane.

If you read my initial post I said Sinfield was the consummate professional who has made the absolute most of his talents. I'm not knocking him in any way for what he has achieved and have the utmost admiration for his achievements.

I was talking about his natural ability versus Dave Heron.

And please don't let's start knocking Garry Schofield because he likes a drink and shoots from the hip. Don't start glossing over how bloody good a player he was, re-writing history because of that.

At the highest level of the game - ie TEST FOOTBALL against Australia and the Kiwis - no British player has performed better than Schofield over a longer period of time during the past 30 years. And that includes Hanley.

That is exactly why I was knocking him.

I accepted his undoubted talent and asked what he might have achieved if he'd had Sinfield's attitude to go with his own undoubted ability.

I only wish Schofield had taken some of his GB performances into the big games he played for Leeds. He was sort of the antithesis of SInfield really.

I know which one I would rather have captaining my club.

And I know who was the better player.

Good for you.

I know who was the bigger d1ck that was never going to enjoy domestic success because his attitude was so under-mining.