So we rest Hardaker/hall Sinfield and McGuire find out their replacements aren't good enough last year and don't win the treble? There's always jam tomorrow.



And Aiton has been a bit part player at Les Catalans. Our problems don't stem from us missing him.Paul Aiton has fewer assists half the amount of tackles fewer carries and fewer metres than Falloon. Les Catalans 2nd best hooker is really proving me wrong.

Nobody on here backs youngsters development more than me over the years. But sometimes you have to realise you are flogging a dead horse.

We don't produce world class halfs because of the way we develop them, not because of writing them off after a few games. The issue is from leaving junior rugby, where they are free to develop skills, into a set way of performing when they get to professional clubs, that is what has made this area of our game go backwards. To be fair to some clubs, and Leeds are actually one of them this season at academy level, they are now actually turning round and not including the halfs in the robotic ways, but actually telling them to play what they see in front of them. This is how skills develop.

We have had better halfs than Sutcliffe in our systems over the last decade who have been and gone, and actually not even playing at a level anymore. He is completely different to what you are suggesting.

Your Tomkins argument makes no sense at all. A fullback nowadays is an extra half, his game is developing exactly the same whether he was at 1 or 6. That is the modern game. Look at O'Brien at Salford, has he been written off too?

And by the way, I have written off a damn sit more Aussies at this club than I have homegrown. I meen good god, in two pages I am accused of slating not giving youngsters a chance previously, to now getting slated for not backing youngsters.

I have heard similar, although have no evidence. It is a bit odd Hull Kr saying they have a new coach coming in 2017 but not saying the name. Perhaps, and I stress perhaps they are waiting until Leeds can say who the new man at rhinos is.

I thought McDermott was on a rolling 1 year contract ?

I thought a 1 year rolling deal but don't know for sure

Quote ="Homer Simpson"I thought McDermott was on a rolling 1 year contract ?'" mutual agreement is the only way Leeds can get rid of McDermott for free. If Leeds were to sack him it's three years pay out. m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/21280579 That's when it was signed.

Quote ="Homer Simpson"I thought McDermott was on a rolling 1 year contract ?'" mutual agreement is the only way Leeds can get rid of McDermott for free. If Leeds were to sack him it's three years pay out. m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/21280579 That's when it was signed.

I would be very surprised if when Leeds and Brian Mcdermott part company the line trotted out isn't along the lines of - 'after an unprecedented period of success for the club, it has been decided after a difficult season that now is the time for both parties to move in different directions.Blah blah blah...yours GH

Quote ="Frosties."mutual agreement is the only way Leeds can get rid of McDermott for free. If Leeds were to sack him it's three years pay out. m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/21280579 That's when it was signed.'" Nothing official there. Only George Riley's opinion. Nothing about 3 years pay either. Guess work.

Quote ="Frosties."mutual agreement is the only way Leeds can get rid of McDermott for free. If Leeds were to sack him it's three years pay out. m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/21280579 That's when it was signed.'" Nothing official there. Only George Riley's opinion. Nothing about 3 years pay either. Guess work.

Before Wembley we were looking comfortable but 3 of our losses came after that when we lost 3 on the trot and looked knackered.

The 2004 team went out of the cup in the 5th round.

Flip their cup runs around. The 2015 team go out in the early rounds and the 2004 team go all the way to the final then I'd hazard a guess that the W/L records would alter a bit.

Well actually I would say his organising in defence is missed. However whilst the defence hasn't been great look at some of the totals we've conceded....

.....if you said at the start of the year we'd concede 14 points away to Salford you'd say fair enough and expect us to have scored more than them to win. Likewise vs Cas, they score 16....yeah not such a total we couldn't out score, the Wire game vs first week, even Wakey at home if you said they'll score 20 you'd imagine we'd have scored more. Granted been a couple of bad ones like the Widnes game and HKR.

But it's the attack barely being able to score that's the problem and the attack we had last year was set up to suit the players we still have here. It wasn't a structured, disciplined, need a wise head like Sinfield to guide us through the plan setup. It was keep the ball alive, throw an offload and don't be held down by a plan......ideal really for a team who wouldn't have a wise old head to guide them and hold their hands through a more structured detailed attacking game plan. So Sinfield's absence doesn't explain why these players can't be scoring more points as the style of attack last year wasn't one that was designed with Sinfield in mind or played to his strengths of controlling games. I dare say at the start of last season Sinfield was actually the weak link in games as the style we were going for really didn't suit him as a player before he got injured and missed a few and had no trouble scoring in wins vs Wigan and away to Cas and Catalans in one of our best little sequences of results from last year so proof the players can do it without Sinfield holding their hands.

They actually showed in the first half vs NQC that they could do it and that's the most the attack has resembled last year's in terms of keeping it alive and making the oppositions defence having to make an extra effort to get to the offloaded player, however because it was against an NRL defence you don't get as much reward. If we reproduced similar in the league games we would've scored enough to win a number of those games we lost but the players simply haven't thrown themselves into the league games like they did the WCC match.

Too simplistic.



Again too simplistic to just say other teams have had injuries. It all depends on which players are injured at the same time and in addition to our injuries we had already lost three stalwarts from our Triple winning side. Two of these were our on the field leaders and one our game manager, organisor and leading kicker. Did the other clubs you mention also have this serious handicap to overcome too?

The club made signings to try and replace JP but did not for key man Sinfield and placed their faith in the unproven Sutcliffe to take on this role. Something which I seem to recall you agreed with at the time.

So when new captain McGuire got injured in the first match we were left with no option but to trust in Sutcliffe, Burrow, Lilley to responsible for our key pivot positions (as Falloon was one of the injured) Sadly these three have proven to be inadequate and their job was made even more difficult by the poor form of senior players like Hardaker, Watkins and Hall etc. Also since Falloon eventually was fit enough to play he has been a big disappointment so far.




We have lost one game by 2 points and another four games by 4 points. In each of these we have missed kickable goals which in all but the last game could have changed the result.

Our form in all aspects of the game has been terrible but although our defense has been woeful at times it is our attack that IMO has been the main reason for our position in the table and this comes back to the lack of adequate halfbacks and decision makers.



But you do not know if Mac had requested a replacement for Sinfield do you? To keep repeating that you apparently believe Sinny and JP did "plenty of coaching" does not make it true either. As I said before you too were happy for us not to sign a half back and you felt Sutcliffe deserved the position.



I am sure there are as many examples of new managers being worse than the previous ones eg in football things have not gone too well for Man U Fergie left have they?

Correct.




The lack of a second team/development is another of the reasons for the decline in our sport. Players need to play every week when fit and so those that have not make the 17 plus players returning from injury should play in the 2nds along with a mix of younsters who would then have time to adjust to the senior game without the same pressures. To achieve this will need extra funding which is another reason to increase the Cap.

Too simplistic to show a clear factual example of where a change of Coach worked at a club with plenty of injuries at the time of change??
In terms of me backing Suttcliffe i still do 100% but he was never going to be the leader that Sinfield was neither was Mcguire something i clearly also said at the time.
Not replacing "Sinfield/JP" is clearly meant in terms of on field Leadership and as we are witnessing off field influence not nescersarily positionally.
Also re-Sinfield/JP the Coach himself has reiterated on numerous occasions over previous seasons the amount of input they had on/off the pitch so not just what i believe a fact backed up by the Coaches comments.
Did he ask for replacements? He was pretty vocal in backing who we'd signed & how we had enough in the group already id say that indicates not.
Ive already said GH takes a portion of the blame but also the teams we've had available could & should have performed better you accuse me of being simplistic with certain opinions but for you its straight forward to blame HB's??
Hmmm anyone watching us knows clearly its not just down to HB's the whole shape with & without the ball has been pish more often than not even with Mcguire & Burrow running the show.
I'll also add even with plenty of players available we hardly ever look like winning & we certainly look short of any sort of game-plan.
Cas are riddled with injuries which include a HB & their go to FB yet they are often more competitive than not & have a clear plan & shape no matter how basic we have neither.

Unbelievable cobblers about Sutcliffe on here. His collapse in form is entirely understandable - have a look at how bad Hastings and Nikorima were going for the Roosters until recently.

Young halfbacks thrown in at the deep end will almost inevitable be the first to lose confidence when the team is playing badly because they have so much more responsibility than anyone else. Its no coincidence that Hastings is now looking much better having moved an experienced forward to play alongside him. A couple of weeks ago he looked like he'd never played the game - passes all over the place, wrong options almost every time and his kicking game (previously a huge strength) was dreadful.

From what I saw last year Sutcliffe has the makings of a very good SL stand off. What he needs though is a partnership with a more experienced player that lasts more than a few games and to play in a team where so-called senior players aren't taking the mickey.

In terms of junior development I'd say its been poor for a while now. A team like Leeds with its resources ought to be aiming to have two or more juniors at about the stage Handley and Golding were last year every year - and accept some will move on as there is no first team spot for them. We haven't had a decent forward come through the Academy since Ward 5 years ago.

Sutcliffe was never IN form. Whenever he played, Sinfield was on the bench to rescue the situation. Sutty at one good game vs Wakefield when he played full back.

Apart from those games/wins Sinfield missed vs Wigan, Catalans and Cas.

Off the bench 4 times, we were already well ahead of Saints when he came on. He didn't rescue us vs Warrington at home (but Sinfield was poor when he started vs Wire in Round 5). We beat Hull at home when Burrow was in the halves and Sutcliffe was filling in for Hardaker at FB. And Cas at home we lost which I put down to GH refusing to move the Sunday game vs Wakefield forward even though we were then playing on Thursday and unsurprisingly looked like we could've done with an extra day or two.

I guess you missed the games Printer listed then?
Prior to injury he was OUR FORM HB simple as.

Agree with both those points. It would have been difficult enough for Sutcliffe if he wasn't coming back from a serious injury and the pack was actually playing well. McGuire really struggled when he came back after his knee reconstruct in 2011. Wasn't until near end of season he got back to his best.

I must have missed Sinfield coming off the bench to rescue the situation at Saints, when Sutcliffe created two tries in a dominant first half performance.

Sutcliffe is one of the comparitively few recent Academy graduates (of those allowed to make 1st grade) who should be persevered with. He needs a game managing, experienced half alongside him to take some of the responsibility away if he's going to develop into a quality running stand-off.

The cross field kick for Handley's third try was fantastic, Sutcliffe tormented the Saints left edge the entire game and should have been the man of the match.

Because the sun might shine today does not mean it will shine tomorrow. It shows a random example that does not take into consideration other important factors. In all Wakefield's wins since their change of coach their main two halfbacks (with Finn a successful kicker too) have been major factors as indeed they were when they beat us by 4 points.



Yet you still were happy to have both Sutcliffe and McGuire play together in the halfbacks! I cannot follow your logic Rhinoms. Sutcliffe would need to be along side Cooper Cronk to be effective as a 6. IMO he quite obviously should not play in a pivotal position (apart from perhaps fullback) as he is not a decision maker or a game changer. This does not mean he should not figure in the squad. I have said many times his skill set is better suited to centre and he has been useful as a bench utility player too.


Ok then for which position would you have recruited a leader and goal kicker.




What is you definition of numerous? and did you ever consider that by giving credit Mac is showing motivational management skills? It is quite usual in professional sport for the coach to allow the captain, senior players and assistant coaches to run parts of training sessions to give imput and practice among other things decision making and on field leadership. This in no way means Mac's role in our success is diminished as you have tried to insinuate.




Come on now Rhinoms he is hardly likely to say to the media that he is disappointed with the signings is he? He has to tow the company line and has to try and motivate the players is has got.




Who is responsible for the recruitment at Rhinos and the purse strings? Now I do not know the conversations between BM and GH regarding recruitment matters and neither does anyone else. So to keep asking for the coach to be sacked without this knowledge is unfair. Other clubs have recruited some quality at halfbacks in the same timescale and if necessary we should have been prepared to use the marquee budget if necessary to try and replace Sinfield's role in the side.

Now I do agree that despite the very serious and ongoing injury list (which I think is worse than most other clubs) we still should have collected more wins and put on better performances. But this has been down to the other major factors which is the loss of form of so many players and in particular the senior ones. Again form comes and goes with experience players and novices alike and then eventually magically returns too.

So I have not said it is simply a lack of quality at halfback but an accumulation of several factors which include: disruption in pre season training, long term injuries to key players, additional serious injuries in training and from the first two games onwards including our new captain and creative half back that meant we could not field a settled side. On top of this we had poor form from senior players and a failure to replace our main game manager at half back. These in themselves should not have been game breakers but when added together have become a recipe for disaster. I believe most if not all coaches would have struggled in the same way that BM has struggle with these particular problems.

Why I keep highlighting our failure to recruit a quality half back as a major problem is because this has now unbalanced our squad. Although McGuire has improves his all round game he still is essentially a runner whose first instinct is to make a break. Burrow and Sutcliffe are both runners too. So all these type of players need a creative passer as do the rest of the team. Lilley shows signs of being creative but it is asking a lot to come in and run the side. This major weakness has been cruelly exposed after we lost McGuire in the first game. This weakness has been proven with the complete failure of our attack which should have won us at least four of the close games we have lost and had that happened we would be sitting in 5th place now without all the panicking.



To be fair to McGuire it seems he still isn't fit yet but without a creative player our shape will never look right. Confidence is low but there were some better signs I felt against Salford. When Burrow went to acting half back we did at least cross the line three times and on another day would have scored three and won the game. Form has to return soon and with the all elusive confidence and momentum and then you get some run of the ball too. For a new coach to come in just when things are due to change seems unfair.




Or the ability to play to a game plan. I am sure dropping the ball over the line or dropping a high bomb was not in the game plan.



Their main goal kicking play-maker half back has played most if not all their games this season so not a fair comparison. Had we had McGuire all season I think we would have won at least enough to be ahead of them.

Only because Sinfield was out of form for a number of games. Had he not been Sutcliffe would have been on the bench.

How he got in the team is irrellevant if as he did he was clearly worthy of that spot once in & he showed clearly he has enough to be a 6.
Also he only list that place due to serious injury not loss of form.

He definatley plays his best when he can focus on opening up defences instead of trying to move a team around. I never saw him play much in the academy but it seems to me that he is not a natural organisor and needs a halfback partner to help him out in that regaurd. That is why it is a little baffling to me that he hasnt played a full game next to Mcguire yet this season.
He has shown he has the ability to throw good passes and put in good kicks but only when the 7 and 9 is moving the team around effectively.

We must remember that Mcguire only really developed as an organisor when he was about 30.
Also I dont think Milford can organise much but he is still probably the best 6 in the world atm.