If Foster doesn't play then presumably Lomax does in his place. That would be my selection.




Is there a reason Lomax wouldn't be taking the kicks if he's preferred to Foster?

The coach should have been stronger.

Earlier in the season you were complaining that Leeds weren't protecting the players when they got injured, now you are suggesting they jab them up to get them out there when they shouldn't.

Good luck tommorow from a Cas fan I have been to every final since 1994 and have never seen a bad final with Leeds in apart from 1995 which was a bit dull. Always a great atmosphere as well.

Because early season games have the same significance


A lot of fans have this down to make or break our season, so seen as Eastwood is out of the door come october, if possible why not take it into consideration?

Even if the player is leaving, Leeds still owe a duty of care to him and to his ability to continue with his career for as long as he remains an employee.

Asking the player to risk further long term damage to play in a game of any importance isn't morally or ethically acceptable IMO.

Too right. Its down to the coach. Every player at Leeds had a burning desire to play in that game, can't blame Adamson for having that desire. Same goes for Keith in 05. Sometimes players get ahead of themselves, its up to the wise head of the coach to take step back a little. I just want Leeds to explore all options for tomorrow, which im certain they are, but also do it sensibly.



Too right they do. That balls down to the stage that Eastwood is at with the injury. Its the players choice and if he puts his hand up its up to Bluey and the medical staff to come to a sensible conclussion.

I love those who get on their high horse and lecture everyone on subjects only the players involved and coaching staff know the full story about.

Why is Senior playing in '05 not remembered as fondly as the heroic Radlinski in '02, according to urban legend he couldn't walk on the morning of the final.

Because Wigan won and Radlinski had a blinder, neither of which could be applied to 2005?

Well said - would we expect an employee to attend work if they were clearly unfit? no - why do some think rugby players are any different?

I'll remember that when you bring up public sector absenteeism rates in the Sin Bin shall I?

Players damage their bodies every time they play. Players rarely play without carrying some form of knock or injury. It's just a question of degree really.

I couldn't really give a tuppeny s[ihi[/it about Eastwood's long term career or health if I am brutally honest.

Food for thought for the idiot who claimed Ali is "stelaing a wage".

How does that sit with your random Lauitiiti rant from a couple of weeks ago?

We're talking about Eastwood who for some bizarre reason seems to be more adored by our knowledgeable fan base than Ali........................

Well only because there's a chance Eastwood will play this weekend .. no one's comparing him to Ali......

The comment was made in comparison to Peacock who a week before the Wigan CC game attended a Bramley game with his leg still in pot - his determination to make the Wigan was in direct contrast to Ali who took another 6 weeks to return from a calf strain!!! He played another 30 minutes and he is out again?

Do you think Peacock would have been out for as long with the same injury as Ali - no I doubt it, so yes I do think like Brad Clyde he is not earning his money?

No probs Andy - first answer this question

Why is the sick rate much higher in the public sector than the private sector - the range of work is similar - does that suggest that sick in the public sector is seen as another way of taking holiday!!

Average sick for Leeds Council employees is 13 days yes 13 days so all these bods must have a poor health record if all this sick is real - but you know as well as I it isn't.

I have nothing against genuine sickness - but you know like I do that the amount of genuine of miniscule - sickness at my place .75% and that involves manual labour manufacturing.

What a completeidiot you are.

Unbelievable comment to make.

No there not. No one is criticising him the way they're criticising Ali. Which is bizarre given their respective acheivements for Leeds, career longevity and dedication to the club.

I've no idea.

You can roll your eyes to your hearts content, it won't stop you talking inconsistent nonsense.

Leeds were not taking chances with players fitness early in the season any more than they did when Peacock played in the Quarter Final, anymore than they will take on Saturday. Now you want them to numb a player's injury to get them out on the field.

1 - Wellens
2 - Gardner
3 - Gidley
4 - Flannery
5 - Meli

Has always been the preferred lineup on the odd occasion when they've all been fit. We also have Lomax and Foster in the squad. Unless Potter is going to make a big call and drop one of those mentioned Lomax could come in and kick I suppose.

We could always put Flannery to the backrow, Meli to centre and one of them on the wing I suppose. Decisions, decisions.

No doubt Flannery will score.

Cunningham is due a try against us also.

So are you saying that Peacock played whilst not fit?

Or that Ali is faking injury?

Or both?