Lockers did not lose us the game, Super Sam did, but the lack of creativity in the halfs (due to Lockers) did not help

Rubbish, no one player lost us the game, the team lost, Sam made individual errors but so did others, Leeds were excellent yesterday, we didn't play well, that's sport, it happens.

I got a text at 16-0 down saying Finch is having a shocker and thought at the time 'he can't do anything without the ball'. We've definitely lost something with Leuluai being out but there's very few halfbacks in the world who we could have stuck in and it not be a step down.

Our attitude in the first 15 minutes cost us that match yesterday not the choice of halfbacks or referee. A couple of players looking short of full fitness didn't help either.

We made 5 errors in the first half that were converted in to 5 tries by Leeds (the 5th courtesy of a poor penalty decision). We let the game get away from ourselves and had too much to do to claw it back.

Locker's error for their fourth try was an important one IMO. We had just scored 2 quick tries and had got back within 4 points. Sean takes in a drive and loses the ball and Hall goes in at the corner the next set, completely stopping any momentum we were building.

Sorry, i thought we lost by 2 tries, oh wait a minute we did, well 11 points to be exact, now i wonder which player gifted the opposition 2 tries, who was this player? i just can't remember

You really have not got a clue have you, that's not how it works, what about the other points Leeds scored, who's was at 'fault' for those, other players missed tackles, gave away penalties, dropped passes, did Gelling 'gift' a try by missing that cross field kick or was the player responsible for closing down the kicker at fault for not doing his job, when Bailey reached over to ground the ball who didn't clamp the ball carrying arm, as I said before, its a team game, we win as a team, we lose as a team, no individual was responsible for the defeat.

We conceded 39 points, the most this season. Due no doubt to the worst performance of the season. The number of players who played well for the whole game can be counted on a few fingers. Most played well at some time and poorly at others.
As for the OP's comment about half backs. The Finch at 7 and Lockers at 6 is something we may well not see again as Matty Smith is in the squad for the rest of the season. Should he cop a knock then will Wane go back to yesterday's 6 & 7 or bring back Mellor, maybe alternatively play Williams there as suggested some weeks ago?
Whilst Tommy is out I think we need a regualar 7 with Finch at 6 and Lockers to remain at 13 no mattter what.
Agree that the loss wasn't down to half backs or any individual but a very poor team performance.

My point exactly.

Correct.

Sinfield did ok at 6 didn't he.

We need to stop giving this excuse.
Lockers is a better player than the one who never smiles.

Lockers was playing like a 13 yesterday, I'd like to see how many hit ups he made.

You win as a team and you lose as a team. Yesterday there were far too many errors from a lot of different players.
Wane will be furious about some of the team defence, particularly the soft Bailey try.

Leeds deserved their win.

Only happens every few years ....but I agree with Rogues, win and lose is a team effort .....trouble is you lot thought it was a shoe-in to the CCF and you got caught out by the tykes

I understand some people's criticisms of having O'Loughlin at 6.

For the past 5 years we've had a scrum half who has consistently been a major influence in our side and this year, with his injury, we are lacking cover in the halves and the hooking position. This has been a huge point made throughout the season by a lot of fans.

By losing Leuluai, moving the on-form 6 in the league 10 yards further inside to play at 7 (if you watch our structured attacks) and then to cover him - we move the on-form 13 in the league to 6, we are always going to have problems.

Now we have signed Smith, who can slot in at 7 or 9 (ala Leuluai) we should be OK for the rest of the season but obviously, we were going to struggle in the cup with the constant pressure we put ourselves under due to some basic and woeful errors.

You can't lost the ball 5 times in your own half in the first 20 minutes of the game against anyone in Super League. Also mentioning our defence, which was a shamble. I think in the entire game, if Leeds started a set within 30 years of our line, we stopped them from scoring only twice.

Poor defence, too many errors in attack and a lack of creativity from the spine of the team. It just wasn't our day. If (and it's only an if) Smith hadn't been cup-tied or TL hadn't broken his leg, I'd be pretty sure we'd be on the way to Wembley come August.

I'm now looking forward to the rest of the season, with the likes of Richards, Leuluai, Fielden & Prescott all to fully return (hopefully).

Just hope you lot are not pinning all your hopes on Smith....or maybe I am

I just think it was a mental loss rather than it being about players out of position. They just were not on the ball in the opening half. What we did actually produce in attack was brilliant I thought. Just that I think we had 35% possession overall.

Maybe you should have warned us.

You have been warned that all your eggs are in one basket .....scrambled or quiche you choose

I like my Omelettes made with five eggs....

I think that as well, also although Leeds were the better side on the day I think they played quite poorly. With a bit more luck in attack (Hughes knocking on with about 10 mins left) we could have won. Leeds should have put at least 50 past us for the way we played and yet they couldn't.

The effects of playing Lockers at 6 are plain to see. The plays are just not as fast or fluid when he gets the ball and he has simply not got the legs to make a break as you would expect from a 6 on his own. What is more moving him for 13 to 6 removes one of his biggest contributions to the team which is his defence in that position.

All this was being said before the cup semi-final and has in fact been said for years whenever he does cover at 6. It has also been true for years that when he does, it isn't a success.

The same problems occurred in the semi-final - as they did a couple of weeks before v Bradford so I really do not think the positional changes can be dismissed and the result put down to mentality. Not when it is so obvious how this change affects the team.

My view is there was absolutely nothing wrong with the mental approach at all. It was a combination of factors that lost us the game, one of which was the positional changes due to injuries. The players wanted to win it as much as Leeds did but some were not fit (God knows why they were picked when unfit), Sam had a nightmare costing us two or three tries depending on your point of view and the team just made a load of mistakes gifting Leeds posession.

The team hasn't looked the same since the stupid exiles game. On fire before it and not looking pretty ordinary.

Pretty much agree with all of that.

One thing that baffled me was just how flat our forwards were standing to take the ball in.

This from a Shaun Wane coached team? I couldn't believe what I was watching.

Good for you, looking on the bright side



Enjoy you week off

Agree with Dave, but fortunately this shouldn't be a problem (barring injuries) for the rest of the season as Matty Smith will surely be 7 and Finch 6, allowing Lockers to be 13.

Then when Tommy returns, Smith can interchange with Micky Mac - get all those playing in the same 17 and the majority of the rest of the team fit and we'll come top of the SL and get to Old Trafford.