He was already injured wasn't he? I'm sure he had a leg injury in the first half that lead to Saints try from a kick.

So that, combined with the knock he'd already taken to the head was probably why he was a bit reticent taking the ball in.

Fantastic hit from Amor though, totally legal. Hits like those are what people have to bear in mind when you're talking about rest and recovery for players, hits like those just didn't happen in the past.

Neither side had any attacking structure. Apparently when Leeds get a set within 10 of the opponents line they bring a big lad back into the ruck 5 times then throw it wide, losing 15 metres before the last man on the end of the line puts in a crap kick to nobody.
It's not surprising that SL players can pass in space. Leeds found it out wide, Saints strolled through the middle. It was Saints of old, making huge metres from dummy half again and again.

The game had slightly more quality than the previous meeting this year, but it's hard to look at some of that defence and say it was a quality game. Better defence needs better attacking play to break it down, strolling through forwards who are not communicating and leaving too much space between them is frustrating to watch rather than exciting.
However, it would be unfair to say the players from both teams were not giving it all they had.

Agree. A fullback of Hardaker's experience with ball in hand on his own line should have kept clear eye contact with the opposition and should have been looking to get to ground ready for a quick PTB leg injury or not. It was a game changing moment.

For some to suggest that there was not some excellent attacking play is well wide of the mark.

There was some excellent attacking play, just as there is in sevens.

Agree. Bluddy awful. I can't believe some of have been saying how 'entertaining' it was. You score, we score, your turn, no defence, no intensity, touch n pass crap.

SL this season seems to be on a steep decline. Not enjoyed any of this year.

I'm probably being harsh with the 'lack of heart' accusation but it was clear throughout that defence wasn't a priority for either side. I'd agree that there was a lack of structure in attack. That is an issue which will have bypassed all those cooing over the entertainment level and individual off-the-cuff moments in wide open space.

Many have highlighted the relatively weak player pool in SL, a Salary Cap which remains stuck at 1999 levels. I'm starting to think that perhaps its the coaching at all SL clubs which ought to be top of the list of priorities that requires sorting ASAP.

English coaches moaned and groaned over a decade ago about not getting the opportunity to coach a SL club as most positions back then were taken by Aussies. Well they've since been provided with that opportunity over the past decade and the performances ain't too cracking as SL playing standards continue to regress.

The question that keeps coming to mind with McD's Leeds, is how are they trying to play? That kept coming up last night. Right up to the last 2 minutes when effectively started their last guaranteed possession. We drove the ball - relatively innefectively 5 times, then tried to move it on the last, fluked a scrum and then totally wasted it again. It's like nobody knew what they were supposed to do - not as individuals - but as a team strategy.
I don't think Leeds have played the same way twice all season. In recent seasons past we are practically schizophrenic, as if there is a real desire to not reveal our A game until near the end of the season (as if nobody has ever seen us play playoff rugby before). Last year Cuthbertson brought something completely unexpected, a strong running offloading game up the middle. The team adapted to maximise that and with Aiton playing well we were head and shoulders above everyone else. But you just got the feeling that none of it was planned. This, for me, is why Leeds have been so awful this year, they don't know how they are supposed to be playing, and the coach doesn't know how to give the team a pattern.
There is some justification to say that squad sizes and lack of real reserve grade rugby means teams have to play a style that depends on whoever they can get on the pitch. Wigan seem to have the greatest ease dealing with injuries (big list missing this week) without losing their shape, because that actually have a shape to begin with.
I think there are a lot of good players in the league at the moment, but a lot of crap teams. Will be interesting to see what Wayne Bennett is able to do with some of them.

First thing Wayne Bennett will do is to select the vast majority of English players who are playing in the NRL. He'll do that knowing that they are currently playing under structured regimes and coached by coaches who appear to have a genuine clue.

That'll be Burgess S, G and T, Graham, Hodgson, Whitehead, Cooper, Widdop and Reed. It wouldn't surprise me if Bennett also selected Joe Burgess who remains on the periphery of first grade at the current 16th placed NRL club. There may even be a couple of other NRL selections of players we don't know about yet who have English grandparents. Does Darius Boyd fancy a change of guernsey?



After that, selections will take the form of SL players - a damage limitation exercise if ever there was one right there. I hope Bennett can do something with them

Ah the old 'Darius Boyd follows Bennett everywhere' joke, back when he used to be not as good some Aussie fans used to joke Boyd had some incriminating photos.

No problem with the Amor hit, nice to see and good to see a response of sorts from the Leeds forwards for about two minutes after.

When in the past did big hits like that not happen? Always were a part of full time pro league although greatly reduced these days which is a pity. Fereti Tuilagi was always my favourite not in a Leeds shirt and obviously Morley in it.

This absolutely spot on - when the interviewed Todd Carney he said Glen Stewart was coaching the defence at Catalan, rumour has it that Sinfield coached the attack at Leeds. Leeds have no set attacking plays especially in their opponents 20 you really do wonder what McDermott does with them every day in training.

I am not saying we should have Michael Maguire type who just wants robots to play like an American football team - they are terrible to watch, he will gone by the end of the year but we need a change up in the coaching department a different philosophy, ethos and most of all ability

If a lack of attacking structure can produce scores of 38-34 and entertainment to match then I think most fans will say bring it on. The sooner we ditch the boring and predictable play along with the robotic negative interchanges the better.

That works ok against a defence as poor as Saints won't work against the likes of Wigan and Warrington

The same unstructured, entertaining style that was much applauded throughout the SL and worked pretty well last season and was most successful against all comers I seem to recall when we won the treble. The beauty of playing this style is that it unlocks "structured" defenses which have no answer. This in addition to the huge entertainment value are very good reasons to encourage this style which takes us back to the handling roots that made rugby so special.

What do you prefer? Boring over structured repetitive set moves all based on some form of obstruction run by gym freaks who can only manage 15 minute spells? It is this over coached sort of style that has led to a loss of individual rugby skills almost to the extinction of the side step or body swerve in the modern game.

Agreed. I'm glad you put 'almost' though - there are a handful showing real flair. I can't have been the only one to enjoy Ash Handleys scissor kick when he scored his try? Even my wife knew that was special.

Yes Handley's try was special, although some out there are suggesting it was all down to poor defense! Fages and Lomax showed some class too and Golding has elusive balanced running skills that will take him to the top.

There has to be some structure, even last year we had a structure, which included several set plays. The best teams in our sport have some set patterns but can either adjust this patterns to suit particular situation or play completely of the cuff. At the moment, we seem to be lacking any form of structure, particularly in the opposition's 20m zone, and we will not progress until we do.

In relation to the entertainment value, I've seen and forgotten plenty of high scoring crap games like Friday's fair. The games you remember are the close, hard fought contests that keep your attention to the final hooter. The last three games of the 2015 season are perfect examples.

Exactly!

Handley's hitch-kick was a real throwback, must have been watching some old footage of Lewis Jones.

Having questioned his bottle at times last week was pleased to see a much more consistent effort from Golding this. Dropped kick aside looked up for it. Lilley recovered from a really poor start - could and probably should have been adjudged to have conceded the disallowed score on the line putting Leeds three scores behind and seemingly on the way to an absolute tonking. Place kicked well again which is going to give McDermott a dilemma if and when McGuire retakes the scrum-half role but I expect we'll see McGuire back to stand-off and Sutcliffe shelved for a spell.

according to jjb last year the squad finally got to grips with macd's structures , wasn't sinfields structures or the rise of aiton and cuthbertson or the return of stevie ward . presumably they've all been forgotten

I agree Ronzy that there has to be a basis of structure but League has become too predicable because of too much structure which IMO has suppressed individual flair in favour of physical monotany based on a form of obstruction. One of the reasons for the decline in appeal of SL. Would you agree that we were the best team last year yet had the least structure?

Yes we have looked to have little structure in most of our games this year but equally we have looked to have little ability too with a succession of individual errors and poor decisions. So logically if you argue we have no structure you also have to say we have no ability in equal measure.

Therefore I suggest it is ridiculous to summise that our coach, who got the balance so right last year and also in previous years, has somehow decided this year to throw out all structure for some unknown reason and is therefore to blame for our current lowly position.

Would you agree that a far more likely reason is simply that we lost our two most influential players and didn't replace then well enough. And that this was further compounded by long term injuries to key players including our new captain and main replacement playmaker. Throw in a few new recruits and youngsters with only half the other senior squad to choose from and it is no wonder the side looks to have no structure. What was the final blow was the terrible form of senior players such as Watkins. Hardaker and Hall who failed to show any form or responsibility.

If players make mistakes on the field it does't mean they lack skills or that if they show little structure in matches that they are not coached to play with structure.

With regard to the Saints match I am sorry that you regarded the attacking play as crap. Much of it IMO was high quality attacking play with some excellent handling and offloading to create space and scores.

There have been more positive signs in the last couple of games that perhaps we are turning the corner.

Only took 3 years then.

I wasn't aware that I had pointed the finger at McDermott but, like the players, he has to shoulder some of the responsibility for what goes on within the field of play.

If you want my honest opinion,I believe the problems are more routed in confidence than application and that Mcdermott doesn't seem to have the skills to turn that particular issue around.

I didn't say the attacking play was crap, I said the game was crap, mainly because 50% of the endeavour (the defensive side of the game) was well below par. I would also argue, as others have already, that some of the attacking play was only successful and any form of spectacle because the defensive intensity was so low.

Plenty of positives from individuals & some of our link up play in attack was excellent but imo collectively we are still far too weak defensively.
Its all well & good enjoying open attacking RL but it'd be much more enjoyable if we could defend & by that i mean basic tackling & controlling the ptb.
Lost count how many times we have 2/3 players all over the place at the ptb its getting to be a real weakness.
Once again i'll question Achurch's selection & Delaneys both p!$$ poor management imo Baldwinson deserves a chance & iv no u19's are deemed ready use the loan market.
Wednesdays interview with Delaney said it all he'll always out his hand up to play even injured thats where we need stronger management if he needs 4wks to recover or 3mths use that time ffs.

All the best games I have ever seen have been won by scores lower than 30.
There are lots of examples, but the two league games against Wigan in '98 were rediculously good games.

Sure, shootouts have their place , Leeds did score some very good tries on Friday - but watching guys walk through f*** awful defence again and again is not entertaining, it's frustrating. No point in scoring a great try to then concede a pathetic one.