yes I agree.we blew 2 of the games. but as the season goes longer the old set of forwards get more fatigued. injuries can't be helped. it happens. but for me the squad is not as good as recent years. we needed a couple of quality of second rowers. for me, if all teams are at full strength we are looking at a 5/6 place finish.
let's embrace the injuries, use it as an opportunity to blood talented kids. we get a few hidings so what?

I actually agree with most of that, apart from your 5/6 prediction, i think we have the squad if fit to finish at least 3rd, but thats not goingvto happen with the current injury list, were not going to get enough troops back before the middle 8 split.

I’m happy that we have probably done enough to avoid the middle 8 scrap and I think we should now look to the future a bit and try some youngsters, Im perfectly happy not to win anything this year, just don’t want another 2016.

yes. we won't go down so get the kids in.most fans aren't daft. we know we'll lose a few,get a few hidings, but like 2001/2 the kids will gain so much from the game time

Agree with the sentiments regards the young lads. Imagine what a dozen plus games could do to to aid development and a lot of them games will be in Super 8s with little pressure but against quality opposition.

We should play our strongest possible team, as McDermott will. Anything else would be pure madness. If you want to watch a team full of kids go and watch the u19’s. This is a must win game.

Id have no problem whatsoever seeing a number of the u19's playing.
In fact id prefer it to seeing our OAPS struggling after 10 minutes or lads clearly injured kept on the pitch.
I'll also say 2/3 would be more ready had they'd be given opportunities earlier.
P.s. I see JC is still bleating about Galloway a player that key we improved without him.

The best way to blood youngsters is 1 at a time with seasoned top class players around them. I'm all for giving chances to young talent like Johnson & Holroyd but only if ready. These 2 are 17 and going well at u19 level. Trout and particularly Dupree look more physically ready but let's bear in mind none of this lot have played 5 minutes of championship football never mind SL.

The long term development is more important than trying to throw a load of these in together if not ready.
Rightly, I don't think McD will ask boys to do a man's job.

It's a massive step up. I think Cameron smith has done well this year but even he struggled physically v Cas.

These young forwards will only be able to play short minutes anyway. II'd prefer to wait and play some later in the year if we are playing dead rubbers as part of a stronger team.

The Galloway excuse just Highlights a lack of knowledge rather than defends a position. The failure to grasp the fact that Oledzki was the replacement chosen by the club for Galloway, they have replaced him. Without the injuries, Oledzki would have been at Fev all year. Can anyone really say that Mullally and Singleton have offered more than Oledzki this year? Never mind Galloway himself.

The only ones bleating are negative one eyed critics like you and Gotcha who post more comments when we lose than when we win. How many times have you had to eat humble pie regarding your opinion of our coach? Does it perhaps equal the number of Championships and Cups he has won?

With regard to Galloway. We were 2nd in the table the day he played his last game for us and we finished in 2nd place. So quite how did we improve without him? Do you think we would have done worse this season had he been fit to play?

But I forgot you don't like facts when they get in the way of your prejudice do you?

The Coach point has plenty of credability i dont deny it but id rather question him & his methods during the regular season than just be a sea lion & clap any old dung we're served.
That really does come across as "boo hoo"


Did our performances improve without him? Yes i think they did we looked stronger especially defensively & if i remember rightly we WON a GF without him no?
Also this prejudice spiel is ridiculous onto this year he wouldn't have made my 17 with everyone fit anyway.
Also while we're at it id have kept Mulhern rather than signed him in the first place.

Galloway's forced retirement through serious injury from our squad this season is a fact and one that you choose to ignore because it doesn't fit your dodgy opinions.

I do not believe your so called fact that Oledzki was chosen to replace Galloway. I think the facts show that he has not been replaced at all.

Oledzki is not a new recruit and had played in the first team last year before Galloway was injured and he has retained his number 28 shirt for this season. Since Galloway's retirement his number 8 shirt has gone to Cuthbertson and his number 10 shirt has been taken by Singleton and Mullally has moved from number 20 to number 16. None of this supports your opinion.

But let us look further. At the start of the season it was Ormandroyd that was selected ahead of Oledzki who has been used with limited minutes from the bench. Indeed his first SL start was our last match against Castleford and this despite starting earlier 5 matches with only 3 props and in one case starting with only 2 props. Both JJB and Delaney have started at prop ahead of Oledzki and Ferres has been used as a change prop while Oledzki.

By the way I am a big fan of Oledzki who I think has a big future and I think our coach has correctly not been tempted to overplay him despite his serious shortage of big props.

So to pretend we have been not been one big prop light in the squad all season is to distort the facts. And for you to suggest that Oledzki, despite his promise and who is still leaning his trade, is able to match the gaping hole left by Galloway whose rock solid middle defence has been so missed this year is a nonsense.

Mullally has been a disappointment this year but you insult Singleton by saying he hasn't offered more than Oledzki.

I disagree with your views on Keinhorst who is an intelligent centre and would be a regular in most SL sides and certainly a better centre than Bateman at Wigan. He scored a good try for Widnes against St Helens on Saturday and was strong in defence.

Your rugby knowledge might improve if you relied more on facts and got a better view on match days....perhaps the TV would be better for your eyesight.

I would have keinhorst in too JC.
I would have Sutcliffe, when fit, in the second row. he's not good enough for the backs. he has size and good tackling technique.
we should have replaced galloway to supplement oledzeki.the fact is all our second rows are past there best. you can carry one or two but not all of them which is what we are doing now.

Are you suggesting we would not have won the GF had our first choice starting prop Galloway had been able to play?.

Galloway did the hard stuff in the middle of our defence and made very few errors. His carries always took in several defenders and we miss his experience and size.

Did you state at the time your opinion that Mulhern should have been given a starting spot instead of signing Galloway or is this due to the progress he has recently made?

JC - could you Keinhorst getting a game at Wigan/Saints/Hull/Warrington - not a chance he is a very average SL player with a limited skill and a distinct lack of pace. Bateman at centre is on a different plant to Keinhorst to suggest otherwise defies any kind of logic and cannot be supported by the physical evidence.

The fact that fans think Keinhorst should be anywhere near a side like Leeds suggests expectations have plummeted. Leeds have indicated he has no long term future at the club as a big supporter of the coach surely that indicates to you he simply isn't good enough at this level.

I think you are wrong on the Galloway/Oledski thing - I think his elevation was chosen as an inexpensive replacement option when Galloway retired - that is the only logical assumption that can be made given the lack of activity in the transfer market.

On Peteru there isn't enough evidence to support whether he is another Kylie or a Ben Cross/Ormondroyd so I would suggest he should excluded from any argument regarding injuries. The fact the coach doesn't want to use Ormondroyd despite the injury/suspension issues should be considered when in the argument the use of Delanney/JJB as props is being spouted.

keinhorst is a squad player. he's being used as such. although id prefer newman to get a run i cant see it happening.obviously if have moon at 4 but I've ignored him ad despite his failings at 6 he won't be moved

I am sorry I know it doesn't help, but I can't do anything but PMSL at Juan.

Watkins being ruled out for the season is a massive loss but most teams would be glad to have a replacement of Keinhorst quality. As 3rd or 4th choice centre he would make most SL squads imo.
Galloway should have been replaced, but only if a player of suitable quality was available. Having so many players out long term in the same position would stretch any squad.

McDermott himself has said that Galloway was a big loss as he did the type of work that allowed the likes of Garbutt and Cuthbertson to do what they do best.
Whilst many bemoaned the what Galloway gave to the team he clearly was used for a specific role that helped others perform to their ability.
He should have been replaced for sure.
On the Mulhern debate I always rated him probably more so than Singleton.
I also feel that Keinhorst as a squad member is/was a valuable asset and probably better than Handley and Sutcliffe in that position.
That is not to say he should be a regular LC but nevertheless is good enough to be in the squad even at Leeds.
Saying that I would sooner have Lilley at SO than Moon which would no doubt upset some on here.

Im suggesting we won the GF WITHOUT him & got through tough play off games to get there proving his "loss" is anything major.
Also re-Mulhern i was vocal in backing him just like i do most of our jnrs & his progression has shown maybe we should have gambled on him rather than an expensive 30+ import.
Its all well & good adding experience etc but lets give the younger lads a go first.
Also imo Oledzki would be in my 17 before Galloway.

Mulhearn, mcshane, Mincello hardaker, the four involved in the student assault, all no longer at the club. just leave that here.

never realised the first 2 were involved. thought mcshane had gone by then?

By a good few years I thought.
Maybe he came back for the fight?

It was Minicelo & Cretin the other 2 were nowhere near.

4 players where involved, pretty sure.

found this, yes apologies to Mcshane but mulhearn was involved and i guess it had a part in him not being retained.

extract from national and local news.
Leeds, who will sack Hardaker if he lands in trouble again, have given Minchella a written warning and fined him half a month's salary. Three other players - Rob Mulhern, Josh Walters and Ash Handley - have been fined and given a warning. They were involved in the night out but not the assault.