I honestly think our biggest problem is mis-management of the media, too often we're in the HDM (or elsewhere) spouting off about how we can beat x, or how if only y had happened we'd be lifting trophies. I'd love 6 games of no comment from FC, announce the team and that's it, do the talking on the pitch, and not get excuses in early. We saw it last week, Radford already commented on the short turnaround, they're supposed to be professional RL players.

It wasn't a tactical issue at all. It needed certain players to hold and control the ball better. That's basics, not tactics, in my opinion.

It was both IMO. We tried to play low-percentage rugby in wet conditions. It wasn't working but we stuck at it.

If the weather had been fine or the errors had been less numerous I'd agree with you about it being basics only, but crash balls at the line with a slippery ball invite disaster, which we duly got yet kept asking for more.

I believe that the weather probably did have a greater detrimental affect on us that Leeds but there's no question they handled it miles better. If we'd gone into safe mode I very much doubt we'd have created anything at all against them.

That's why at the time I was very disappointed with Rankin's effort against Moon when Moon decided to go on a play on his own. Conceding that try early meant that Sinfield could just keep turning us around and making us bring it off our own line. Moon wanted that ball more than Rankin and that was very, very disappointing.

I agree with all that (although I think there's a middle ground between difficult crash balls right at the line and safe mode).

My original point was merely that our poor attack was as much about us as Leeds doing a job on us. Whether it was our poor handling or poor strategy placing greater pressure on our handling, either way we let things that were within our control cost us.