Oh that acting half back play was as simple has that.

100% agree, there is much more to it than that.

Who are you suggesting picked the team?

Burrow playing as a hooker distributed very well. Which ever hooker started made no difference to the result. The whole team is playing well and Burrow has been the starting hooker in 2 out of the 3 wins.

Quick thought.

Has the development from Watkins and the addition of Briscoe freed those at 6,7 and 9 from thinking they have to try and win the game on their own with a moment or two of magic, resulting in better ball getting to the threequarters in space?

I'm not sure. I think that this is the most complete 1-5 we've had at the club in my time. There is not a weak link, so when the ball goes left you have the options of Hardaker, Moon and Hall, and then on the right you have Hardaker, Watkins and Briscoe you have so much choice as a half back. You just have to pick the right option

I also think that there has been a step up in the role of Hardaker this season, with him taking on more of the Webb role. That again takes pressure off the halves.

FWIW I still don't think that giving Watkins loads of ball will necessarily mean loads of joy. Its about getting the ball to him at the right time. He can't do it on his own, but get him a bit of space and he will murder the opposite man more times than not

Burrow has also not been out on the field for a full eighty in any of the three games to date.

A welcome change from last season's approach of keeping a key dangerman on the field regardless of the contribution being made.

Leeds' defence has started on fire this season with the only problem area being the kick to the Burrow/Hall flank leaving Hall isolated.

Need to find a way to defend those better.

Interesting and I tend to agree. Last year I thought we only looked organised on attack when our game plan consisted of playing almost entirely in the middle section of the field. We could make easy yards with Delaney and JJB hitting inside angles rather than them ranging outside linking with the centres. Always cutting back at the space behind the ruck. After we had made the yards though our attempts to actually score were not outstanding. Any movement of the ball wide was laboured, predictable and generally badly organised. I think the tipping point has been Briscoe. You can't add a guy like that and not seek to use the ball on the right. Funnily enough I think BJB is a good finisher, with at least as much gas as Briscoe, but for me it's mind games. Delaney still runs the inside angle but Hardaker has really stepped up as the extra link man. He seems to demand the ball more and Sinny and McGuire are giving it to him.
I don't really know what went on with England for him, or what the club did as a response but it has had a huge positive effect on his rugby this year so far. Great attitude from the kid. He reminds me a lot of John Holmes, tall and rangey, good hands, strong and a good tackler. He is also making the backline tick as well. He seems to prefer running to the right as well, where Webb seemed to want to go left so he could throw those bullet miss passes off his right hand.

I guess a teams style is dictated by the players available. You can't decide on a pattern of play and then simply go out and sign the players to make it happen these days. As one dynasty declines another rises and how we play - particuarly on attack - will be dictated by that threquarter line for the forseable future I think.

I'm not sure I agree entirely with the last point.
Wigan & especially Saints (me & my obsession again) do have a "house" style regardless almost of the personnel on the pitch.
That style runs throughout the club starting with the youngest age groups meaning that as they step up the style of attacking play is second nature to them.
Add some outstanding players to the mix then is the icing on the cake.
I believe that all clubs aspire to this but they don't all succeed.
It's about the seamless transition upwards so that no player is out of place (as far as possible) regardless of injuries.

Some good points there and the change in use of Hardaker as a linking full-back is the key to it. Wouldn't necessarily put him down as a John Holmes-type player though - he's quicker than JH but will never have those hands. If we're going to give him a high comparison to aim for it would be ET (without the dreamy good looks).

The other difference so far this year is a devolution of responsibilities from Sinfield with the kicking game both with kick-offs and dropouts (Hardaker) and kicking out of hand (Hardaker and Moon). Having that range of options on 5th and 6th makes it a lot easier to confuse defences, make yards and get over the line.

Some great points all round above and long may it continue i will add though AG with so many great options left and right plus their "latter years" maybe 6,7 and 9 realise they cant/don't have to win the games on their own anymore which to be fair they've done countless times in the past.

How many minutes has Burrow been on the field for each game?

Last season Burrow was one of our most consistent players when many of the others were out of form.

Hall has never been the best defender and this year against Warrington he just didn't jump when Monaghan scored. He is lacking a bit of confidence at the moment.

Hall was caught cold a little for the 2 catalans trys as well. He has these defensive blips in regards to positioning. When he gets it right he's a good tackler.

As for Burrow I know you've said before you prefer him on the field for 80 minutes. But I think we look vastly improved when he is spelled and he can then be refreshed and more effective against tiring defenders. Look at the carnage he caused when reintroduced against KR. He split them down the left and we scored. Coupled with a hard tackling hooker in Aiton (who can distribute crisply at a better tempo) will do the tackles it sees Burrow not having to get stuck into this and frees him up to do what he does best, running with ball in hand.

Fewer than the full eighty in all three games played so far and implemented as a deliberate tactic. A welcome change of approach from a coach seemingly now prepared to think inside the box.



Perhaps in your opinion he was but you'll appreciate that others may take a different view as to whether starting him at hooker made the best use of his threat.



Hall was also given no protection or assistance from either his hooker/half-back or centre in a situation where the attacker in motion is always likely to be at a distinct advantage over a static defender. Senior may have stretched what was permissible under the rules in this area but he gave his winger support. Burrow was completely lost - may as well have been on the bench.

Criticism of Hall for the Monaghan try is unfair. Standing start against a pinpoint kick caught by the best jumper in the league with a running leap. The best that could have been done was to interfere with Monaghan's leap, Senior-style, but refs have cracked down on blocking plays since Keith was around.

I'm a huge fan of Hall.

But fair criticism is due on that example.

You make it seemed pre-determined that there was nothing humanly possible to stop him.

If his position had of been improved he could have competed for the ball or been a legal nuisance to the dog loving leaper.

Got to agree, Hall's effort for the one against Wire was quite poor but I think credit has to go to the kicker for the one Catalans scored, that was just a very good precise kick.

So you don't know then. I am sure the coach is wanting to see what his new hooker is capable of so it makes sense to try him at different times in a game and so far more positives than negatives.

However your augument has previously been all about him not being what you called "a proper hooker" and highlighting Burrow not putting in a high tackle count around the ruck. My augument has been that Burrow is too good to be limited to cameo performances. Because he has been brilliant coming off the bench in the past is to overlook that he has also been brilliant staying on for the full 80. The team in recent years has lacked some sharpness in attack and IMO it didn't make sense to reduce the minutes of one of our best and most consistent attackers who has not lost his speed unlike some others.

Now another point I would make is that if you consider Burrow to be good enough to come on as a hooker from the bench then why do you accept that in this case it is ok for him not be defending down the middle. The much made point that his speed is more effective against tired forwards is not so valid when he comes on after 30 minutes (Catalan) which coincides with fresh opposition forwards coming off the bench and in any case Burrow is one of the few players that retains his speed and freshness even when on for the full 80.



Well we are all only expressing opinions and yes I still would prefer Burrow on for the full 80 but am quite happy that all or part of this should be as a half back.



Hall is quite used to dropping back in anticipation of the 5th tackle kick. Quite why he cannot in the same way drop back over his own goal line, in anticipation of an incoming kick to the wing, so that he is then moving forward to jump and challenge defensively in the same way he does on attack?

You cannot blame his centre or hooker/half back (who are both good defenders) for Hall's weakness in this area or most notably examples of his rush out of the line ploy which lead to tries in both our last WCC and for England in the World Cup

For me, its not about getting the ball to the best players as often as possible. the game is more complex than that. Its about getting your mismatches as big as possible. Same as you wouldn't expect Watkins to be given the ball on his own line and make breaks, you'd not want to do the same with Burrow. For me if he comes on after half an hour you get a maximisation of his time on the field and the mismatch of speed and agility. 25mins into a game you have probably 10 of the opposition with 25mins under their belt, then possibly 2 with 5-10mins under the belt and maybe one other with a few minutes. All of these are in a worse physical position than they would be at kick off. A forward who had been out there for 25mins would hate to see a fresh burrow coming off the bench. Any laziness at marker, any quick play the ball will be punished. This things do not occur so much in the opening quarter so you weaken parts of your game (defence & distribution) for only a small impact.

If he drops behind his line then its a man not just out of the line, but taking him out defensively altogether. It would give him a better position to field the kick from, but it would put him at a worse position for a regular tackle.

The defending winger is always going to be at a disadvantage as they don't know where the kick is going to be, they are on their own, and they can only really fail (knock on, miss, driven back over the line).

It was a bad read from Hall, but I think that it is pretty much the hardest skill in the game diffusing a well executed kick to the corner

Its a very difficult position to defend from.

If Hall drops back into the in goal then he risks being out of position if the attack spins fast ball wide and from that sort of range a good winger can crash over by the time he reaches them.

If he stands his ground then, has highlighted here, he runs the risk of being out jumped from a standing start.

What he needs is for the inside defensive line to push across and to get blockers in front of him to help out.

IMHO of course

What Hall needs to do is lose weight!

[size=150WFW[/size

The in-goal/in-touch areas are quite short on most grounds so we are only talking about a few metres and he would drop back in anticipation of their kicker punting for the corner from the centre of the field. He is then in a position to move forward with momentum to jump for the kick (like a full back). Or if the attacker doesn' t kick but spins the ball wide, the defensive winger has time to move forward and back into the line again but with momentum - in fact in a better not worse position.

Anyway in Hall's case he has usually rushed forward out of the line so it would not be worse.





Well all the more reason to try something new because if he is always at a disadvantage if he remains rooted to the spot, so better we find other ways to defend this much used and successfull kick to the corner tactic. It cannot be worse! Also if the defending winger has dropped back a few metres he will be in a much better position to judge the trajectory of the ball and increase his chances of catching it without the risk of being penalised for obstruction.



True but you will have a better chance if the defender is airbourne and attacking the ball. If you cannot catch it you would also have a chance of palming it dead.

I know that it's a change from last season's approach and done seemingly through choice rather than forced through circumstances.

Good to see a coach able to think inside the box.

Delaney the obvious choice if going for the NRL style loose forward with Ablett/Ward suited to link/angle running and passing second rows to create space and ball for a dangerous three-quarter line.

What's not to like when the talent is utilised rather than wasted.

A coach has to make his decisions on form and availability. In previous years BM has started the season with more injuries than this time and this season he also has Briscoe so he has the luxury to play a more expansive game. If circumstances change you will see him alter his game plan to match.

One day you will realise there is much more to our coach that you have given credit.

I have given the coach credit but perhaps unlike some I will also continue to question some of his decisions.

__________



Which players being unavailable meant Burrow had to start at hooker and remain on the field for the full eighty?

I'm encouraged to see the coach currently making better use of Burrow but I'm yet to be convinced that Aiton offers much from loose forward in his second spell.