The worst part is we did the same thing against Wakefield at home, by not setting up for a drop goal it cost us the game

That basically means that in the review for the Wakefield game (for some reason) it was not made clear to every player when and how to set up for a drop goal, something most should know anyway
Mcguire was set for it a couple of times but Burrow ignored him as did many forwards who instead of driving for the posts decided to pass it on or crab looking for opportunities out wide

Was Sinfield seriously the only player in our team with any brains?! When you here the crowd all saying 'now... now... okay now... ' you know we have lost the plot

On top of that it seems a lot of players have forgotten how to count to 5, as that would be the only reasonably explanation for being caught totally unaware numerous time when the 5th tackle was called

A drop goal is too obvious, that's what the defence is expecting. Apart from it being virtually undefendable if it's done right of course.

If a SL club doesn't have a drop goal set then all the coaches should be sacked on the spot. Has Roy Hodgson been mentoring McDermott?

The only different between Mcdrmott and Hodgson is that mcdermott isn't managing a bunch of overpaid gutless k unts.

Exactly.

After one failed set Ryan Hall was literally stamping his feet in frustration, after Galloway ran in a circle then passed to Cuthbertson who knocked on. Another of those sets, on the last tackle the dummy half (Burrow) passed to JJB, who passed to Singleton, who passed into the crowd.

Those diabolical final sets were a perfect microcosm of this seasons attacking shambles.

thing is burrow and McGuire should have been demanding the ball on the last. they weren't in sight half the time

Tad- couldn't agree more. On the 5th tackle its up to the halfbacks to demand the ball. If the rest of the team are too dense to know what's going on, then they should stand first receiver and force the acting half to pass to them that way. Burrow has never been a demonstrative player, but McGuire seems happy enough mouthing off to all and sundry - he needs to grow a pair and if necessary physically push his forwards out of the way to get what he wants. You simply cannot get by with two passive halfbacks.

Maggsy was perfectly placed for the 1 pointer everytime but if players cant play the ball correctly or if the ball goes to JJB and Singo instead what can he do???

Danny seems to be getting some stick for not being a leader but if professional players need telling what the heck to do at 22 all with 3 mins to go its embarrassing! 16k in the ground knew what needed to be done so its hardly a question of leadership on that occassion.

I think most of the blame goes on Burrow, from dummy half. He didn't need to demand the ball as he was the one putting it out. He should have took better options. However, I dissagree with you on McGuire, he received that ball plenty of times in good position and move it on wide, instead of keeping it going forward to the posts which is what teams would normally do when setting up.

I agree Gotcha. Burrow took wrong option a couple of times, Cuthbo attempted a ridiculous offload on 1 occassion with 3 men on him. I think Maggsy was in position for the drop goal a few times but ball never came.

For whats its worth i wouldnt drive to the posts in a dg set as the dumny half then has to then turn 180 to pass ball to kicker and defence has more chance of pressure. 10m either side of posts to allow a quicker pass. But heyho ball never got delivered so lesson to be learned.

Not saying any of the criticism is unfair, but this is a try and if it's given as it should be then drop goals are moot. Poor show by Thaler but that's become the norm these days.

he was well short and lost it. right it front of me. it wasn't even close

Nah from Carnegie Stand you could clearly see he was short before losing it.

Except that's a still off him grounding it on the line. Not short, certainly not well short and he definitely hasn't lost it.

The photo is taken from an angle where it would look like it was on the line. I was in the Carnegie Stand and unfortunately it has short of the line when he reached out and then lost it on the ground. It wasn't a try.

I am in the Carnegie, and I agree totally with you. It was short and then lost. The try was never on, and I took it as though that was why he was brought off because of the brain fart of attempting it.

Think he had an ankle injury to he honest Gotcha, he had a protective book on after the game. I like Ferres, he's a tough lad, works hard but he cant resist having a couple of "brain farts" every game. I think there is more to come from him tho. Some players take a year to fully settle at Leeds.

Up until that "brain fart" which I called it, I thought he was clearly our man of the match. Thought he had an excellent game on Sunday, covering a lot of scrambling defence to stop Widnes after others had missed.

You going to the under 16's tonight?

I agree about Ferres on Sunday mate.

Yes I will be there I rarely miss. Should be a good game tonight. Looking forward to seeing Jack Broadbent, Tommy Holroyd and Muizz Mustapha again. Very promising lads. You going?

Yes going, my son is mates with Harrison, Corey, Loui, and Henry Mitchell so obviously wants to watch them. When you speak to a lot of the junior under 15's, and I can see how good Jack Braodbent is, but a lot go on about the Siddal centre Brody Graham who is on the bench I think.

There's a photo on the official Rhinos twitter feed from the front of the Carnegie which shows no part of the ball hits the line.

[urlhttps://twitter.com/leedsrhinos/status/749628879858438144[/url

Sorry to be a pedant, but that's actually a photo that shows that the ball isn't on the line at that moment, it's from at least a couple of frames after the screen shot I put up and it proves nothing about whether the ball had hit the line or not. Either way, those claiming that with the naked eye and in real time from 25 feet away it was clear as day that Ferres was 'well short' of the line are wrong.

Ball is on the ground. It's clearly out of his grasp - he has his fingers resting on the top of it.

If the ball is propelled forward from that point, then it's a knock-on. There is no way from that photo that you could either give that as a try or see a way in which it could become a try.

No, but what I'm saying is that (in my opinion) the ball may have already been grounded on the line prior to that shot, and that this is when the ball has come away from both the line and his hand after that moment. As I said, the twitter still is clearly from a couple of frames after the still I posted (you can tell by the position of the defender who's coming in from the sides hands) and with Ferres being pulled back and the way a rugby ball reacts to being placed on the ground there is no way from that photo that you can say that the ball has definitely not been on the line prior to the shot being taken.

But it clearly wasn't grounded on the line as everybody in the Carnegie Stand can testify.
It was short - no question of that.
The bigger question mark ought to be about the alleged interference in the two play the balls right under the Widnes sticks in the last 5 minutes or so.
Having said that I don't hold Thaler responsible for the loss, we did not deserve to win for all the reasons stated earlier.

I'm at the U16 game v cas. looking forward to it