Rain or not the completion rates were shocking, even from wigan, but hulls was something else. Even in october playoff games and grand finals it has chucked it down and both teams have kept hold of the ball. The weather is no excuse, it seemed like hull barely completed a set. Add to that there was only 2 tries in the game with 1 coming in the last minute when celebrations were already starting. It was just an awful, awful game with 2 poor teams but one team reaching all new levels of sucking.

It was a decent game, and Ryan Hall made it worth watching on his own. But Leeds took a huge gamble with their negative tactics, if Cas had been a bit more patient and organised they could have outscored Leeds easy.

Sinfield nailed the game plan, apart from one poor kick his kicking was outstanding and won them the game along with Hall's freakish finishing.

I don't really want to see teams play like that, but if you have Sinfield in your team and you can't win the CCup final to save your lives normally you may as well give it a go.

See I just don't get where the gamble was in Leeds tactics or why they're described as negative.
You kick to put yourself in the best position you can after your set of tackles. Most teams in most games have gone with the tactic of keeping the ball in play and trying to get a good kick chase to keep the opposition pinned down field.

If your opposition has some excellent kick returners and also is a team that pressures kickers very well, as Cas did to Leeds in the game at Headingley, and they're a team that likes to build momentum and play with speed, then why on gods green earth would you play into their hands?

Putting the ball in touch and then pressuring Cas in their own 20m area with fast, tough defence is no more negative than a kick that splits the full back and winger and a fast kick chase.

Leeds tactics were no more negative than anyother teams in any other game. They were just different and worked.

Your whole post is based on an opinion that Cas MIGHT have done X, Y, Z so Leeds should have put the game to bed sooner. The gameplan was not to let Cas do X, Y or Z and it worked to perfection. Thus rendering any other possible outcomes irrelevant.

You are welcome to your opinion. I'm off to watch my team show off the trophy.

Giving the ball to the opposition deliberately at the end of nearly every set is negative, as in the opposite of positive, which would have been to promote the football to create a try scoring position through an attacking kick... a kick to the corner to the winger, a high bomb, keeping it alive and moving it wide.

Most teams at least mix these up a bit, Leeds kicked to touch nearly every set. That is hugely negative in my book and limited the amount of tries they were going to score. If Hall hadn't scored 2 tries he had no right to score it could have been a very different game.

It's a good tactic when it works, but it's negative and on another day it wouldn't work.

You could say this about any tactic. You play what is in front of you and you do what you need to do to win. Those kicks ruined Cas, they never got out of their own half. A masterclass from Leeds. Interesting that opposition fans are the only ones criticising.

The kicks didn't ruin Cas, poor composure and structure in attack ruined Cas. Like I said I enjoyed the game and Leeds deserved to win, but it was fairly negative tactics and you can't rely on Hall to score tries like that every game.

Cas were never really in it. IMO of course. Yes, they got within six points for a while but during that time they were struggling to hammer away at the half way line, let alone the try line.

Leeds weren't far off scoring 2-3 more tries which would've made it as much as 41-10. If that's playing negative then i'll take it every week thanks.

Ah you're a Leeds fan. I understand why you're on the defensive. You see criticism where there isn't any.. Quick to jump at anything you see as negative.
No point in arguing that point discussed any longer.
As said in my pointless first post which is void in your eyes. Well done on the win

Fair to point out it wasn't all negative on the last.
Briscoe's try came from a repeat set after Clark couldn't take hold of a McGuire grubber through.
McGuire's try came from a kick up targeting the full back.
Hall's first try was actually on the last tackle.
Hall's second came from a repeat set after we forced a drop out with a good kick through.

Get what people are saying about "could've" put the game to bed earlier IF we'd tried more. But when we met Cas the last time we tried forcing the ball near their line when we had a 6 point lead and knocked on and Dorn made a break on the free play and him and Sinfield became "involved" and we all remember what happened there.

I think it shows a confidence in your defence. We control how you start your sets and we back ourselves to stop you. We're happy and calm enough to defend a tight lead. This particular group have been in more tight big games than I can remember and how they manage the 2nd 40 minutes is nearly always spot on.

You are right. Cas were nervous and leeds defended well too. I just think that it could of been a higher than a 6 point margin if they'd of shown abit more aggression on the last play. Forcing a goal line drop out or bombing the ball for Dorn who was shaky for most of the game.
6 points is 6 points. Any team could even fluke a try to level it up.

He has as much insight as a rock to go with his charisma. Why must we suffer him?

It might have worked out that way. Conversely, Cas might have fielded the ball and launched counter-attacks in broken play - one of their strengths.



If allowed to play the game on their own terms, Leeds know that they don't need to be flamboyant to win. Even if Cas had managed to level it, Leeds have been in similar situations in previous finals, have stuck to their game plan and won. Purely hypothetical but I doubt they were ever going to go into panic mode.

And you aren't a Leeds fan, that much was glaringly obvious. 'No point in arguing' - roughly translated as you don't have one.

I'm not no, but I've nothing at all against Leeds. One of the top 4 teams I actually would rather see win the likes of saints, Wigan and Wire.
I don't see how it was obvious. You are just being glaringly defensive over nothing.

I get where you and some of the others are coming from. Whether the wording of "negative" is the most precise word is neither here or there really as we get the jist.

But Finals, in most sports aren't usually the arena where the best most exciting play happens. The tactics from Leeds worked well....arguably better than they could've predicted and Cas did end up for the taking at times. Do you then switch from Plan A? It's obvious to switch from it when it's not working, but on this occasion it was working just fine....so arguably the biggest risk would be to alter players mindsets mid match when not overally needed.

I debated with a Warrington fan a few weeks ago who said that if Wire played the 1st half as well as the 2nd 40 they'd have won. I pointed out that a key factor in how that 2nd half played out was because Leeds played in knowledge of a constant 2/3 score lead and was about controlling the game not finishing it off thus we set our stall out accordingly that second 40.

Settling for and controlling a narrow lead or going for the throat and killing the opposition off both have their own risks. It's whatever you feel most comfortable with and what suits the players your particular club has. Leeds have the players that have gone down the final stretch enough times in big games to know what they're doing. Also as pointed out many times the squad has some age to it in certain areas so a more controlled game benefits them. The league game a few weeks back was a really open affair and we started to struggle the more open it came especially around the ruck. Also got to to consider the size of the pitch the final is played on, it's a big pitch that can become even bigger if your defence isn't set and solid.

I hope I didn't use the word negative because if I did it was a mistake.
I also thought the danger was for Leeds. If Cas had come back at them.. Leeds would of had to have come away from plan A. It would of been harder later in the game for them to change there plan.

Warrington are a class at keeping the ball alive and can destroy teams. Leeds first half against them was one of the best first halfs I've seen in a RL game in a long time.
Almost perfect...

I don't understand the debate; Leeds were in absolute control for all but 10-15 minutes of that game - they had a plan, executed it brilliantly and Cas were never really in the race, despite the 6 point margin that stood for a while.

Not the most exciting game, but ruthlessly efficient from Leeds - their big game experience and star players showed their class and they got a pretty straightforward win; mission accomplished.

Absolutely spot on,.
I wanted Cas to win but very professional performance from Leeds.

This.
I wasn't too fussed who won to be honest but as the game went on I found myself grudgingly admiring Leeds for their professional approach. To say their tactics were boring is like saying Mohammed Ali was boring because he didn't let opponents hit him.

Why was it a huge gamble? Leeds have won plenty of finals including WCC against NRL teams using that very same game approach scoring plenty of points of our own during the process.

It's not negative, it's used to stop the opposition scoring against you, the fact that Leeds kept Cas as far from the leeds try line as was possible had a much bigger say on the final score than cas not being "patient or organised".

Cas scored one try from a very clever reverse kick and another from a forward pass combined with a very poor tackle attempt by watkins, to say they could easily out score Leeds is a bit far fetched imo.

I would have to agree with that, lots of people moaned about the 2013 final being the "worst ever" and it's all just bitterness imo, wigan were just too good at every part of the game for Hull.

A kicking masterclass from Leeds and a great game plan which they stuck to throughout the 80 minutes.

I wished Tigers had got it as bang-on as Rhino's did but ATEOTD I was happy to see my team back at Wembley for the first time in 22 years.

Well done Leeds Rhino's.

It's ironic that someone picks up on the Leeds tactics, because for me, it was the opposite tactics by Cas that stopped them getting in to the game.

Cas kicking was actually good, in the sense that the kicks were deep and between wing and fullback mostly.
The problem was that the chase was average sometimes, and Hardaker, followed by Hall made metres for fun.
I can see wht they started out that way, but the tactic should have been changed and sent to touch so that the defence got a rest and could line up for the one out attack from the scrum.

May sound boring but those two differences in the teams went a long way to the result at the end of the day.