I'd consider letting him go if the deal was right and pull all the stops out and go for young myler before saints get there grubby mits in him.

Agree with this. Also an advocate of Sinfield at 6. Leeds looked much better on attack again with him there. Must admit Smithy looked pretty good at centre too. Donald is still a worry on right. Hall surely has the confidence now to be switched wings. ?

Taking Sinfield out of the pack allows us to put a grafter (Ablett) in at 13, which takes abit of weight off the back row IMO (not to say that Sinfield doesn't put in his fair share). I think that having a half-back on the bench instead of a hooker, and moving sinny to 6 might be worth another look over the course of the season. Especially as Burrow can jump in at dummy-half if need be.

as much as i like that, do we not have buderus and diskin there?

We do, but I'd like to see Buderus get more game time, seen as he's been our best player over that last month IMO. burrow would cover dummy half is Bedsy got injured, but one of the half-backs would come on for say Ablett, with Sinny moving to 13, once abit of the sting had gone out of the game. I think it's worth a look if nothing more.

wonder where all the sinny is not a stand off brigade have gone

have said for years that sinny is the best option at 6, its little surprise that in big games he's been moved there quite often, its little surprise that the few games we've looked good (and actually bossed the game)this year sinny has been at 6. the only real debate is who is the better scrum half danny or rob

Lots of sense in this thread.

Actually think we look better when we start with the back row grafters, Ablett and Kirke.

Good to see that people are seeing the Buderus quality.

Not having Burrow in the team means that we aren't messing around shuffling the defensive formation and we aren't giving the oposition an easy target to run at.

Big fan of Burrow - match winner - but it feels like we've turned the clock back 5 years and we can't play McGuire and Burrow in the same starting line up!

Perhaps using Diskin more outwide as a 2nd Centre down one side, not playing a traditional role but helping create more gaps out wide for run arounds with say him, Senior & Hall would confuse defenders. It would just add another dimension in attack and also help with dumy half distribution out wide as he would still be utilised as act in half down that channel. In defence he would be on the inside of Senior playing a similar defensive role as he does now. Not sure quite how this would work but it's a thought.

Mate not sure about that one at all!? You been drinking as much as me tonight?

Saints have a better prospect in Wheeler at either 6/7 they don't need Myler and neither do we.

For me I would like to see - in an easier game - a Webb/McGuire half back combination with Smith at FB and Senior on the right with Donald

The problem for both Burrow and McGuire when Sinfield plays is he dominates the play so neither has the opportunity to control play - as I said before Sinfield is too slow both physically and mentally to play the playmaker - but sadly he will be in that position until he retires.

This is all in your head David. It does not happen. Are problems are when we allow Burrow to control, he is not up to been the general. When Sinfield does not play the team catipulates, proven each time Sinfield has missed a game.

Sinfield plays 6 in every game he plays - the difference is when he has only one option either Burrow or McGuire he can cope with more than that he struggles

Possible you're right, I thoguht at the time of posting that he isn't big or fast enough but he is a good ball handler and relatively good organiser. Like Lauiti'iti connects the left side to the centre of the park, diskin could do the same but instead of diagonal runs like Ali does he could be employed out there all the time rather than centre of the park. I believe it would confuse the opposite wing man and centre, sucking them in to create over laps. Saying this using him of the right would likely be useles due to our style atm.

Not sure that is quite right Disa - who captained the side in the CC semi v Huddersfield - he only missed one game last year the home win against Castleford - we lost 7/8 games last season with him on the field so the facts do not support your opinion neither does idea that Sinfield controls the attack - watch the games back again.

It's never going to happen.

you are obsessed & so very wrong

it is all in your head, thank the lord you are nowhere near coaching the team and all we have to do is chuckle at your bizarre repetitive rambings on the web

You'd ''consider letting him go'' eh?

Thankfully you're not the coach.

although the aussie haven't used many "overseas" cricketers keppler vessels (former south africa captain) played test cricket for them. on topic i though sinfield created more without having to do his usual defencive stint which allowed our backs some real quality ball and mcguire was a great foil to the good work his forwards were doing

What do people think about binning Diskin and using Burrow as an impact hooker until McShane is ready?

Buderus/Burrow would, imo, be more inline with the '2 hooker' system others use (Cunningham/Roby being the obvious one).

Would line us up as;

1 Webb
6 Sinfield
7 McGuire
9 Buderus
13 Ablett

Sub Burrow

What would people make of that?

I think it'd be more of what the international SH thought about sitting on the bench and then playing at 9 when used

It was just a question to see what people thought, i wouldnt do it personally, i'd stick to burrow at 7, mcguire at 6 and sinfield at 13 with diskin and buderus switching between 9.

the 6 7 13 combo has worked for us in the last 2 gf's

If there HAS to be a choice between McGuire and Burrow then at the moment it has to be McGuire. IMO his all round game is more versatile than Burrow, particularly in terms of his passing game and his uncanny ability as a poacher.

Burrow offers that x-factor in being able to break the line that McGuire does not possess (although his footwork is as good), but too often this season his darting runs have resulted in him getting ko'd and putting the team at a disadvantage.

That said I'm not convinced that Sinfield is a serious long term option at stand-off. I think it is good for Leeds to be able to mix things up every now and then (as with Wilkin at Saints in the same position), but IMO Leeds are at their best with all three of Sinfield, McGuire and Burrow on the field, as they all offer something different in a complementary fashion. Losing Burrow or McGuire from the team long term would make us more predictable and less competitive.

I can't believe all the talk on here about breaking up the creative triagngle which has seen us win back to back titles, after a couple of above average performances in an otherwise poor season.

Personally I don't think we work well with 2 hookers. We were poor in 2005 when Diskin came back, and he shared with Dunemann, and we were also poor in 2006 when we had Millard and Diskin hooking.

There are more problems in the team, than our Burrow, McGuire, Sinfield triagnle. Anyone who wants to change that sucessful formula needs their heads checking

how much impact does Burrow have on his own nowadays?

You are entitled to your opinion - please demonstrate along with Disa the last time a Leeds side capitulated that did not include Sinfield?