In those 3 cases (Mcguire, sutcliffe, aiton) we have better backup in halves/hooker in the shape of Sinfield rather than Burrow. But come 2016 we won't. so not a bad idea to retain Rob's services for 2016. wouldn't be overly surprised if he made way mid contract though.

Burrows was never on Cas's radar. It was a smokescreen to lure our real target, Maguire.

I thought trolls wore green not orange and black

Is that the end of Powell then, if you are bringing in a new coach?

It is a good move IMO. Players with a club for 10 years or more only have half of salary counting towards the cap I think. Also Rob knows he is a bit part / impact player now therefore the chances are the new deal would have probably have seen him take a cut in salary meaning even less damage to the salaey cap. keep him around. brinmg the kids throug etc etc. A good move

Poor move by the club when we have players like Ward and Lilley as back up for hooker and half back.
Does this mean we are now not going to sign Houghton as Burrow can do an equally good job?
Does it also mean we are not signing Brierley?
Very underwhelmed.
The only thing that would trump this signing is giving Kylie another year!!

Another reasoned contribution there from Claypitrhino.

In his prime, Burrow had the ability to take a game by the scruff of the neck and win it on his own with a couple of pieces of magic. Those moments have got progressively less and less frequent over the last 12-18 months, to the point where his introduction from the bench is more often than not weakening the side rather than enhancing it. He's no longer any more of a threat out of dummy-half than Aiton, he's certainly not as competent a defender either and results in the whole structure being reshuffled to accommodate his presence. His service out of dummy-half (the key responsibility for anyone who plays there) is haphazard and often slow.

Neither do I buy all this "leaders in the dressing room" stuff. There are a lot of very experienced, international players in that Leeds changing room. The likes of Hall, Briscoe, Ablett, JJB, McGuire, Moon etc have all been around the game at top level for a while and should form part of any leadership group going into the next 3-4 years.

I'd rather see Leeds give opportunities to the likes or Robbie Ward, Jordan Lilley etc and take some short term pain while those players develop (much as they did when McGuire and Burrow themselves emerged) than invest another couple of years in a player who is already on a downward arc in terms of what he offers on the field.

Does anyone on here know if a player's full salary still counts as part of the cap even if they are also employed as a coach?

no proof, but I'm pretty sure that all salaries of registered players would count, otherwise all players would have some sort of coaching capacity.

Excellent move by the Club. Despite in the autumn of his career Robbie still has the pace and all round skills but what makes him so special in SL is the game breaking ability to make a match winning play all on his own. Added to that he can play (or cover) two key positions. These players are rare and to discard him while he still can do this would be foolish indeed. Big Mac has shown he will give the youngsters a chance and Burrow has not been a starter much this season but I am sure he will once more prove his worth as the season progresses.

Chuffed to bits , he still strikes fear into the opposition and lifts the crowd when he comes on . Not a starting hooker , but still a good scrum half starter or as an interchange in either position . Think Leeds have already decided Robbie Ward not going to be up to the job

double post..

In the words of a Sky Sports Superleague commentator

"Well done to Beep Beep Burrows"

I'm sensing a distinct hint of sarcasm, and I'm not quite sure why, you talk about lilley etc, a player completely unproven, I'm all for giving youngsters a chance, but if it gets to next season and sutty or McGuire gets injured, would you be happy with having lilley as the main option for cover? In which case what are we to do if he turns out to be a complete liability?

Think of the bigger picture you need a squad you can trust, with cover in all positions and options, not a squad of hope and prayer.

Mostly the dismissal of anyone who holds a different opinion to yours as talking out of their backside and full of crAp, which I thought was out of order.

The only way you find out whether someone is a complete liability - and for my two pence worth I don't think Lilley will be, I think he's got all the tools to be a good SL halfback - is by playing them. While they've had problems in other areas this season, Wigan will reap the benefit of the experience that the likes of Williams, Hampshire and Sam Powell have gained this season over the years to come. They've taken the risk of giving these young players their head when it would have been easy to go out and recruit an experienced stand-off from the NRL to partner Matty Smith and hold them back in the Under 19s.

If you are left with Burrow replacing Sutcliffe or McGuire then we have a bigger problem than you realise. At no time, not one single time throughout his career has Rob Burrow showed he can manage a game and call the shots. He has always been on the coat tails of McGuire and Sinfield. He has his own qualities which have contributed to that side, but they have always been released on the back of others performing certain roles. He is a flair player with great pace and difficult to put down, but not a great passer and dictator of moves.

The last thing you want is to rely on Burrow to manage the team around the park. So the argument that what do we do if one of these is injured is still a problem, especially when considering no Sinfield.

That's not the case, on majority of my posts there's a 'IMO', everyone can have an opinion and I respect that, they just need to know mines right and theirs is wrong

.

In all seriousness though, maybe my comment a little earlier was a bit out of order but there's a complete lack of respect being shown to a legend of the club and there has been for some time, even though he does still produce the goods at times (like I said earlier not always with the consistency and level of previous years) and it's becoming very frustrating to see, so I apologise if anyone was offended.

What you've just said in regards to giving lilley a chance; I've said I'm happy to see youth given a chance, who isn't? But you didn't answer what we're supposed to do if he does turn out to be a liability, you couldn't just keep playing him you need another option a safe one that's not a risk, it's all well and good saying 'I don't think he will be' but none of us know for sure so you have to have the back up.

People are talking about it's a waste of cap, it's not, if we wanted another option whilst lilley was being blooded you'd have to go out and spend more cap space than burrow will be costing us that's for sure!

Name me someone that can play the positions he can, that would come at a similar cost and sit back whilst lilley and ward etc we're being bled into the first team getting chances before them, then I'll tell you I'm wrong!

What does cost, and a willingness to sit back have to do with anything? Surely it is the benefit of the team that is more important than anything.

You stated you need someone to step in their if Sutcliffe and McGuire are out. I stated that Burrow wouldn't be the answer in that scenario has he can not manage a team and dictate them around the park. With losing Sinfield also the effect of Burrow will even greater diminish. His qualities although not what they were, are completely different to a player managing a game.

Where has game management come into this? because if anything over the last couple of weeks we've seen that neither sutcliffe or McGuire can do that either!

Have you been reading the comments it looks like you're arguing for a purchase to come in, something we haven't even spoke about

I'd rather first team opportunities are earned rather than given. I know for sure Burrow has earned his. I don't think Ward has earned anything in the opportunities he's had so far.

Burrow still offers plenty and given Sinfield's departure, Sutcliffe's doubtless continuing teething pains and McGuire's up and down form this makes sense.

That Gotcha would describe it as the dumbest move ever or whatever he sense simply re-affirms the move is a stroke of genius.

im surprised there is any complaint at this. It seems the obvious decision to me.

We can't go in to next season with no cover in the halves and hooker and Burrow offers it there. He offers us a lot of cover and a lot of experience.

Having Burrow there doesn't preclude a bit of game time for Ward or Lilley, but giving a youngster a game or so here and there is massively different to expecting them to do it week in week out. What this does mean is that if we do lose McGuire or Sutcliffe or Aiton for any length of time we aren't left up creek expecting a hooker that hasn't really proved himself, a VERY young half back, or as rumoured a 24 year old championship player who couldn't break through at Cas to be starting 20 games next year.

Whilst the news doesn't excite me, neither do I think it's bad.

Keeping him on board I think was always a good idea with regards to his work with the juniors and his coaching. If the coaching/management team feels like they'd be losing too much experience/leadership in one go at the end of the year again it makes sense. It's all very well posters on here saying Briscoe, Hall etc can be leaders now but if the people in charge don't see that in those players to the same extent that you'd get with Burrow then it's a wise option to take. Those players might have played X amount of games now in their careers, but given how we are going to be bringing young players through, have they put the work and time in with the juniors here at Leeds quite like Burrow (and Ablett) have???

Obviously talk of Lilley's chances but for all we know the plan for him in 2016 is to send him away on dual reg or loan as we tried to do with Sutcliffe at times.

Going by how he's struggling to get more than 20 minutes this season then I can't see him being a permanent fixture in the 17 for the duration of those two years so again fears of 'path-blocking' are probably over reactionary. As for wages, I seriously doubt keeping Burrow on will stop us from signing anybody that we hope to capture.

If Sinfield was staying then letting Burrow go might make sense. As it is retaining him makes sense. As a reserve hooker he has dubious value, and his impact off the bench will diminish as he slows down. But in terms of game management, whilst he may not have shown much in that regard previously, he's also hardly ever been asked to do so. McGuire has shown that he can learn to run the team once given the responsibility albeit a bit inconsistently). If he left we'd be one injury away from relying on a player who has yet to play first team at all in one of the key positions in the game.

I also think retaining him isn't just about experience (which IMO can be overvalued) but team spirit. He, Sinfield, McGuire and JJB have been the mainstays of the team that started winning in 2004. The club might well be seen to be 'doing him a favour' by re-signing him, but the message that sends to other players who could be tempted elsewhere (Watkins, Hall, Hardaker in particular) is that the club looks after its own and doesn't discard great players once performances drop off. That messaging is well worth a bit of cap spend.