[url=http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/leeds-rhinos-news/Leeds-Rhinos-League39s-on-the.5220958.jpHave a read of this.[/url

As a taster...


Okaaaay....

So if I read it right, the reason that his lot have been (shock! horror!) losing games - which is clearly against the natural order of things - is because other teams have had the nerve to actually try and stop the opposition winning?







So, because his team have lost some ascendency, we'll have to change the rules now. No change there, then.

By-the-by, interesting to note the - probably unintentional - acknowledgment that Bulls beat Leeds NOT because Leeds were poor, but because our defence was GOOD. Très interéssant....

All very odd, given that Leeds timed their lying-on to absolute perfection when they played us - one nanosecond short of a penalty.

Methinks El Presidente has thrown a tantrum, with the teddy currently well out of the cot?

The ref's do seem to be allowing a little more time holding down at the PTB this year. This obviously does not suit the fast game that Leeds try to play.

One word: Obsessed.

Seemingly not.

Except that is clearly gross hypocrisy, when you watched Leeds when they were playing us.

I did some timing watching the replay: they were exploiting this apparent extra time to perfection - it was a perfect five seconds almost every time, whereas ours varied up to that. I commented on that at the time IIRC? This was after me and all round me at the game screaming at the ref for Leeds' "lying-on" throughout the match. As it turned out they were not - just. They were just very very good at stretching it to the max.

Also interesting to note comments by Beaver and others, coming to play over here, that they find the game at the PTB faster over here than in the NRL?

Really strange, then, that he has a go at two clubs with English coaches, and him with an Aussie one?

I prefer to say that the refs are applying the same rules to both teams. How many matches have you seen where Saints hold down at the lay the ball and then scream blue murder if they are not allowed to jump up and PTB immediately?

Seem to recall that worked very well for them last year when we played them at KR?

Who Hetherington? McClennan an Aussie, call the cops.

OK. Muppet award accepted

It is exactly the same allegation as made against Huddersfield this season. What is interesting is that leeds are the masters of it and also wrestling.

i was really impressed with the fact that it is quite hard to get a Leeds player on his back. I saw Peacock and another of their other props practicing this before KO.

the complaint is about the fact that other teams have caught up with Leeds and Saints in this respect.

the problem is that certain teams get labelled and then the refs pick up on it and they get penalised. When you look at the comments it is all about trying to get you targetted so as to avoid the refs watching them as they are the little innocent victims.

I just don't see how defence can be said to be on top. This season there have in SL, yet again, been the same number of points conceded by defences as have been scored by attacks.

Hetherington's lost it. Again.

Hetherinton said in the Yorks evening post.
"I think it is a bit of a concern for the game that coaches are coaching to stop the opposition and they are getting really good at it.

His concern for the game is admirable, but is it rather his concern over the Rhino coach's inability to match the legal tactics employed by other teams?

Hetherington just likes to see Leeds in the press nothing else and during the last few weeks that hasn't happened as much.

Don't agree with what he's saying and must confess I'm struggling to understand why he said it!

I think, like Hetherington points out in the article, the skill level of SL to defeat such defensive tactics is poor and his (and mine) own club is a glaring example of this at present.

Hopefully this isn't just an attempt to influence the refs to speed up the PTBs again.

Pretty well every time something does not go his way, or some other club steals the march on him, he throws the teddy out in public saying its not good for the game.

I did hear it said, a while back and by someone with very considerable knowledge in the game, that he was just firing the bullets that someone else puts into his head. That may or may not be so, but its every time its something that's not to Leeds' benefit, isn't it?

Or, if he gets his way over something, its "good for the game".

I suspect that with the welcome (yes, welcome) rise to prominence again of clubs like Hull KR and Wakey and Cas, and more clubs anyway able to compete at the top level now - and the memories of Chairman Chris fading round the board table at Rot Hall - he's not getting things anything like as much his own way nowdays?

When CC was here and the dodgy bookie was at the Piedome, they were easy targets and lightening rods for a salesman like GH to exploit. Now they have long gone, he's may increasingly attract the lightening back on himself?

You can HOPE, but....

And anyway, its only for when Leeds are attacking. He's clearly no problem when they are defending, as we continually see.

I agree with that and I hope it isn't either. I see nothing wrong with holding a player up, then putting him to ground before releasing him in the time honoured fashion. Just as there is nothing wrong with an attacker going to ground on his front and getting a quick play the ball.

I'd prefer to see the attacking side of the game improve to counter the tactic rather than rely on the refs to do the job.

I have to grudgingly admit, Leeds seemed to do this very effectively. I said at the time, we should learn from that - excellent discipline and tactics, even though it pains me to say so!

As the report is in the Leeds evening paper I'd say it's intended to quell the disquiet among his own team's supporters, wondering where the recent tradition of free flowing attacking rugby has gone this season.

His use of the term 'cops and robbers' indicates he has a target audience in mind.



Hanley made a career out of it but it's clearly now being employed on a squad wide basis rather than by a select few individuals.

How could you suggest such a thing. Surely he would not have the arrogance to think that simply going public would have the gravitas to influence our experienced referees.
Surely he would have first voiced his concerns for the game to Redhall, and then after due consideration they would have conveyed their deliberations in an edict to refereees.

That's how it USED to work, before his influence at Rot Hall waned a bit...do keep up!



More seriously, I suspect TVOC is closest to the mark.

[size=59Sorry for "improving" your post...[/size

Sorry Adey, had meant to have sarcasm mode employed

You did and I read it exactly that way!




Just wanted to make sure it didn't go past our most recent supporters a bit fast!

Correct me if im wrong but didn't we beat both Leeds and St Helens by 4 points each?

Does this technically mean that his earlier comments about Bradford slowing the play down are nul and void or is it still not right because Leeds didn't win?

What a pillock.