Will it never end



Is there anyone in the squad left that you haven't suggested a change of position for?

The defeat last night was not because Sinfield is too slow for SO. True he had a poor game and seemed to be coasting but he was certainly not alone in this respect. IMO McGuire was equally ineffective but both were playing behind a ponderous pack that was comprehensively beaten by the Wigan forwards with the notable exceptions of JJB who was outstanding once again and two good shorter stints from Griffin. Burrow was buzzing and put in great energy into attack.

Both Hauraki and Webb had shockers and the latter just didn't seem interested in defence and took bad options/excecutions on attack. Hardaker and Ablett swopped centres after about half an hour which didn't improve things at all. That said Wigan did play well both on attack and in defence

Moore and BJB should play next week.

I didn't state we lost because of Sinfield at SO. Elsewhere I stated we got battered in the forwards ( with the one major exception of JJB ).

It has been suggested before Webb could be tried at SO ...with McGuire remaining at SH ....and Sinfield to LF.. Why not ?

It would of course allow either BJB or Smith to be free to claim the FB position.

Without a doubt Burrow is best used as the super sub and that is where he should be utilised most effectively.

*yawn*
We'll never win anything with Sinfield at 6....

If only it was as easy as that. Maybe Burrow doesn't want to be a subtitute. His performances last year made almst impossible to start Burrow on the bench. I though he looked your most dangerous player against Wigan. Mcguire and Sinfield look too static. If Mcdermott uses Burrow has an impact sub, he could do what Diskin did.

Think you need to be looking at your FB firstly. My grany could have made a better attempt at tackling Charnley than him

FFS! Why do people continue to insist that Burrow's amazing performances coming off the bench somehow prove that he should stop coming off the bench?!?!

Making tackles at fullback is very different to making tackles in the line. Its much harder to do. Having said that, they were pretty poor efforts. He also go handed off too easily by O'Louchlin

True but Webb is a specialist experienced International fullback of whom we can expect better. These days he is just not committed enough in defence and is constantly out of position. When we are defending our line he is invariably 2-6 metres from where he should be when following the ball to the wings. Also he is not good at shepherding a breakaway attacker in the direction of where he (Webb) is best place to make the tackle (normally towards the touch line side) and so he is often left grasping thin air as the attacker cuts inside him. His tendency to go high in the tackle means he can be handed/muscled off.

Webb to SO is a possible option to consider this season but would he put in the tackles that Sinfield does? I do not think the coach will make too many changes to the successful GF winning formula for the WCC.

The loss of such a key player as Buderus has seen him experiment with Burrow as first choice replacement 9. So far this has not born sufficient fruit although against Wigan Burrow was our best creative attacker But this decision may have been forced by the injury to Hood. Burrow playing at 9 was not the reason for our defeat at Wigan and as he was one of our few better players how could you consider replacing him with McShane?

If McShane were to make the starting line up who would you replace to bring Burrow off the bench? If it is McShane then Burrow would have to play at 9. If you consider Burrow a better player than McShane then this is why the coach has tried starting Burrow at 9. In the key games last year when Burrow made such an impact off the bench often Buderus remained on the field and a back rower was replaced. This year without Buderus we do not have that luxury so the coach has to do a bit of fiddling until Hood is fit again

Talking to a chappy at the weekend, who believes that there are around 18 to 20 on the coaching staff at HQ. If he's right, is it too late in Danny Maggs career to get one of them to eradicate the flail and flop style of tackle he's perfected over the last couple of seasons?

So you think Hood is McDermott's first choice starting hooker and McShane a distant third ? Why was he given the no.9 shirt ?

Yes I would bring on Burrow as interchange to McShane ... But if the latter is playing exceptionally well then cannot Burrow come on as SH ??

Webb should be tried at SO if only to make way for BJB ( or Smith ) at FB

[iSmith or BJB at fullback...[/i

Hmmm. I'm not convinced Nantwich. One does a very good imitation of a turnstyle, whilst the other displayed zero confidence under the high ball last season.

Still, if we're going the retro route, can I be the first to start a bring back Diskin campaign, as we appear to have a bit of a problem around the No.9 position?

The fact that we were after Heath L'Estrange before he got injured, coupled with McShane's freezing out even when on decent form midway through last season would indicate exactly what the hierarchy think about whether McShane is capable of taking on the No.9 shirt. A failure of recruitment (Wakefield bought a pretty good hooker from the NRL, by the way) and the injury to Hood has left us with make-do and mend, although I can't see Burrow as starting hooker being the answer in any circumstance.

As has been pointed out previously, our good performances last season came with Burrow playing 7 (albeit off the bench), McGuire 6, Sinfield 13 and Buderus still on as 9. It's a complete myth that Burrow was an interchange hooker. On those occasions earlier in the season when he did come on for Buderus against decent teams more often than not our defensive structure went to pot and we started shipping points.

No doubt the club see Hood as the future, and he may well be. But James Roby, who emerged with Saints at around the same age, spent how many years as secondary 9 before gradually taking on the full job without it doing his long-term development anything but good?

In short: if the club aren't confident enough in McShane for him to start then they should have recruited in the summer. The only other reasoning is that they're pandering to senior player-power that Sinfield MUST play 6 and Burrow MUST start and trying to fit square pegs in round holes on that basis. The above players may well have earnt the right to dictate these terms, but it does make the coach's job more difficult.

You're right but I Daren't suggest Hall to FB



You could be onto something with the bring back Diskin campaign ... But think might prefer to see Lowes there ..... Hey I know.... what about Smithy ? ( do you think that one might duck under the radar ?? )

Player power ! Now that DOES make sense.

I do not know if BMcD favours McShane or Hood as first choice hooker but as the more experience of the two it is right he got the 9 shirt. Neither do I know if Hood has been more impressive on the training field since McShane got the 9 shirt.

What I do know is that Hood is injured and the coach is trying out Burrow as starting hooker. This may prove to be unsuccessfull but as the coach he is entitled to try things out without your approval. You may recall there were those last year that were most critical of the coach selecting Burrow on the bench and look how that experiement turned out....eh Nantwich!!!

Actually If you check back you will see that is the direct opposite of the truth. I was an advocate of Burrow being better used as a sub dummy half long before the Leeds coach ....if not before Harrigan. I was also an advocate of Delaney being better used as a forward long before any Leeds coach.... if not before Bloodbath. I also expect a belated move of Hardaker to HIS best position

Where did Burrow play when he came off the bench in game winning displays in the GF qualifier and the GF itself? It wasn't hooker.

When did McGuire last provide the kind of positive spark from half back that Burrow has given us?

We are playing our number 6 at 7, our 13 at 6 our 7 at 9 and our 9 is sat on the bench. All this means is instead of building pressure and scoring good team tries we are having to depend on indivual skill which gets us out of a hole on many occasions, but the skill should be the boost upon good team work, not the be all and end all.

I think thats fair. 2011 was a bit of a write off for DM. I can't even remember him on Saturday.

My point is that if Burrow is playing so well he will be wondering why he is sitting on the bench. Players want to start, Mcdermott has to keep players happy. burrow probably is better coming off the benchbut Burrow probably doesn't want to start on the bench.

Besides that still looked like the only one to score throughout the game on Saturday,

It's the benefit I have of calling things as I see them.

Pioneer - classic bloodbath

Sadly, he doesn't appear to be even close to his pre-injury form despite having a full off-season to get his sharpness back.

Currently I'd much rather see Burrow partnering Sinfield in the halves.

As for Webb, what was anyone expecting? He's been mediocre in defence and attack for the last 18 months and should have been replaced during the off-season by either Smith or Jones-Bishop. Leeds are carrying him at the moment with misguided loyalty.

The whole problem is not Burrows, McShane, etc. It IS because Sinfield "wants" to play Stand Off and so the whole team has to dance around in positions they are not best suited.

McGuire at 6
Burrows at 7
Sinfield at 13 Why Not ?

This coach is dictated by Sinfield - not good & the fact that you guys won something last season was not the coach but the players thinking Fk it - We will do our own thing !!

Well you should know,should you?guy!