I think the stupid fick out the back hand pass comes from him playing wrong centre. His defence and ball retention leave something to be desired but all things can be improved, and he will learn

You don't get many opportunities in game where you have the chance of a set move 30 metres from your opponents line - to blow this on tackle one had a much bigger impact than recovering a ball 10 metres from your own line.

As I said Sinfield's errors are completely overlooked by most on here as if they never happen - and you say I have an agenda!!!

Agree re Burrow but he takes plenty of stick on here - whereas Sinfield gets of scot free. I said before given the amount of ball he gets in a game he has to take prime responsibility if the attack fails to function. He is dictating the attacking strategy of the side on the pitch.

He hardly covered himself in glory against Quins nor was he that hot at Warrington where Briars out played him comprehensively.

Had your previous week's performance been like our previous weeks' performance (note the apostrophes!) then you too would have been celebrating that win like it was the Grand Final! It wasn't the beating of you that made us all so happy. That was a bonus. It was the commitment our players displayed along with some lovely hints of skill here and there which totally took us all by surprise and therefore totally delighted us all! Saints has been a bit of a dark place this season so far, what with Eastmond and injuries and bloody Widnes.

[url=http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/sport/leeds_rhinos_mcdermott_to_favour_attractive_style_1_3018225Here's a reminder of what the game plan consists of...[/url

Well, we're scoring plenty of points Brian...................

Conceding on average more than 27 points per game is a huge problem. Ironically our coach thought we "took a few steps forward in defence last night" when we conceded more than our season average.

Perhaps if we actually did take a few steps forward in defence, before we tackled the opposition hopefully preventing them from passing the ball, we would "take a few steps forward in defence", Brian.

[url=http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/sport/leeds_rhinos_mcdermott_to_favour_attractive_style_1_3018225Here's a reminder of what the game plan consists of...[/url

[iThe former Bradford and Great Britain prop, who has succeeded Brian McClennan in the Headingley hot seat, [uhas been challenged by his boss, Leeds chief executive Gary Hetherington, to win playing attractive rugby in 2011 by producing an "exciting, innovative and creative style of play"[/u[/i

To be honest, just "to win" would be good enough, however I'd much rather win 6-0 than 36-30. I guess it comes down to an appetite for defence, and there is not much better than seeing your team "punish" the opposition with their defence in my book.

Shame it doesn't happen often in SL, never mind with Leeds.

Completely disagree - there is nothing like watching well executed attacking plays - the Aussies in the first half of 2005 at Elland Rd - awesome.

As fans we want to be entertained - Wigan are winning with borderline legal defense; is that really what fans want to see? or would you rather see Benji Marshall at his very best?

If I was being particularly picky, I would want to see Benji Marshall at his very best up against a tough as teak defence, but that might be asking a little much.



I suppose that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I really do enjoy a "thou shalt not pass" defence at least as much as a great attacking play. One of the most memorable sights I remember from a rugby field is Phil Ford catching Offiah at Headingley, fantastic defensive effort.

Whilst I acknowledge your appetite for a critique of the current coaching policy and methods, I also note your reluctance to acknowledge GH's significant contribution in all of this.

Is it not GH who issued the policy challenge to his new coach to produce a flamboyant, entertaining, innovative and creative style of play?

Surely the coach is only following orders from the BIG BOSS himself?

They lost 24-0.

It's not reluctance, merely not got onto it yet, although I understand why it could look like reluctance. GH is, according to the media at least, calling for a more flamboyant style of play, but I don't think he would sacrifice winning for playing in the way you are suggesting. GH is "guilty" of asking for too much in my opinion. Too much from the players and too much from the coaching staff, and that should be recognised.

I made a comment today to another poster, posing the question "If your boss told you when you arrive for work tomorrow, that you have to stop writing with your right hand and only use your left, who would be responsible for the reduction in the quality of your output?" This is how I see where we are as a team at the moment. Players and coaches are being asked to do things they are not capable of.

I do think that if we were to "win ugly" in contrast to the style that GH seems to be clamouring for, that it would be widely accepted as a massive step forward.

We need to separate the issues with the attack from the defence. Defence is about structure, technique and plain hard work. With the right structure and attitude a defence can still function well even with a number of kids playing. What I've seen this year looks like last year - a team with no structure and little or no teamwork in defence.

I have a lot of time for Watkins, but to be honest the coach ought to be telling him that if he tries to throw a flick pass in the next two games he'll be dropped. Simple as. If that means not scoring a try that's tough. The lad needs to run before he can walk, and sorting out his defence and simple ball control must come before the flashy stuff. On the other hand, he also needs to be shipped to left centre, and if Senior is to be retained at all, he should move to the right.

Most importantly, I hope the coach understands that our defensive record is dreadful. And that he has the guts to drop players who aren't performing. With the emergence of the likes of BJB, Hardaker and Watkins, there's absolutely no reason to persist with Senior or Webb if they are not performing.

Just on the subject of possible replacements, didn't Leeds sign Kettlewell as a specialist reserve halfback?

Leeds coach Briant McDermott:
"I thought generally we took another couple of steps forward defensively. We showed outstanding commitment to each other in the first half but, on the flipside, conceded some soft ones which we're going to learn from.

Has Daryl Powell returned in disguise? Utter rubbish. Conceding 30 points at home should be simply unacceptable.

We're soft in the middle of the park (understandable given the injuries to the forwards) and also soft at centre.. Watkins is a huge talent but defensivley a fair bit off yet.. Senior as we all know is past it.. tough season ahead me thinks if we don't get players back soon

Having watched the game back I think much of the criticism is unjustified. I don't see why Sinfield has been singled out, or Burrow for that matter. Sinfield worked very hard and was again our most creative fulcrum. The team functioned well in both facets of the game up to about the 65th minute mark.

I note a complete lack of criticism for Buderus who was comprehensively outplayed by Roby and who was secondary to McShane as an attacking threat. He also fell of a few tackles, usually a strong point of him.

Watkins must work on his ball retention and decision making but as a relatively inexperienced player with undoubted skill and talent I see no reason to get on his back just yet. I can live with him learning his trade in this way and am confident he will come good.

I do share every one's negativity WRT the coaching staff. The team does not build any pressure, has poor completion and that told at the end when they shipped in 18 points in the last 15 mins.

BTW, I predict this week Kirke will have double his carries to an eye popping 8 during the whole game.

Agree with all, except about Burrow. But with regards your second to last paragraph, I just don't think the coaching staff have any choice but to play the way we are regardless of completion rate. We just don't have the players big enough and capable enough to play a safety first game. You have it spot on with Kirke, which is a perfect example of why the coaching staff are playing the way they are. We have a mobile team, but not a team that will win the collission and build hard yards. Things may well change slightly when Peacock and Kylie are back, and with Cross adjusted to the move.

What about the 2nd half against Hull?
From the 5th minute of the 2nd half when we lost Delaney the team dug in ,worked through their sets and went into "grind" mode.
They have shown that they can do it but if/when we get a sniff of momentum they try to score off every pass and where it worked against Salford it failed this week.
Don't get me wrong i think the coach deserves this season at the very least and the chance to impliment his ideas with a full squad but we can/have played a more conservative style this year.

I'm not so sure that is a good example rhinoms. We were already in a strong lead and in the ascendancy.

What I was trying to say is that I am not convinced the players currently avialable can build momentum by just trying to make yards. I don't think they have the size, or desire to do so. The passing game suits their mobility much better.

Only my opinion, but I just don't think it is as easy as people think to change to this safety first approach. And in all honesty, personally I would rather lose and play like Saturday than lose struggling to make yards and grinding out things.

Here we go with the sport v business arguement - do fans want to be entertained or are fans just happy with a win?

GH looks at the numbers and see a distinct/significant drop in revenue on the back of the boring performance the previous season and in his judgement a different style is required if revenues are to returned to the required levels?

Sorry I meant 2004 - when Lockyer was at his very best

From a saints point of veiw, I think you're being a little harsh on some players.
Cross for instance, certainly seemed to be difficult to stop.
You had a lot of good field position, despite me feeling like our pack performed better, so you can thank Sinfields kicking for that. Problem was that you didn't convert when you were on our line.

Watkins got caught out twice by Meli, but he's young and talented enough to learn from those mistakes.

You also managed a lot of decent offloads, which would have seen you get the better of some teams. I thought Burrow looked dangerous when he supported these, but lacked ideas elsewhere.

Do you think fans look at it that way? I'd have thought, in order of priority the factors in attending were:
Expecting to win
Reputation (in terms of name rather than ability) of the opposition
Match day experience (all the way from getting to the ground & away, to seating/standing position, to weather)

with feelings about the style of play the team adopt all well below those factors.