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.

Structure's ok, but players have to be able to deviate from it when appropriate and play what's in front of them.

For one of the few times this season, Leeds on Friday looked like they were starting to play what was in front of them rather than sticking doggedly to a failing game plan. There were good, collective,"team" tries being scored rather than ones relying on someone to produce a bit of magic to make a break.

Maybe the players have now accepted that the league season is almost done and gone, and are starting to play with a little more freedom in them. If they can find the secret of tying that up with more aggressive defence, then maybe we're onto something.

Disagree Andy re-structure especially defensively only 1 good ptb & we get shot to & then we just look like strangers who haven't played together.
Yes the attack looked better in terms of playing heads up RL but i still think we're easy to defend against 20/30m out.

It was refreshing to see Leeds move the ball and look a threat going forward, compared to what we've seen so far this season.

Fell short of the win, but will hopefully lift spirit and mood within the team. A step in the right direction.

When you listen to some of the better analysis of what is actually going on in games you realize that a large part of attacking play is setting up the defence into a position you can exploit. Attacking sets are there to maneuver a defender or defenders into poor positions and then exploit them. Yet good players will always recognize spontaneously when the defence is weak - eg. a slow retreating defender, not numbering up right. These are things you are looking to create with structured attack but sometimes a guy just busts a tackle and the defence scrambles badly and you get opportunities occurring - that's when you play what you see rather than carry on with your pre-programmed next play. The big advantage you have when attacking is that (in theory) you know what you are going to do and the defence is unsure. If you play always off the cuff you lose that significant advantage. I don't buy the argument that "if the attack doesn't know what they are going to do then the defence definitely won't". If you attack properly the defence will struggle no matter what. Good plays have options and if you execute based on what you see defenders will not be able to always cover them all.

I had a simple drill I used to coach (Union - but essentially the same objective) , I had two coloured cones, I stood behind the defensive line and if I held up one colour I wanted the attack to keep it tight - short pop passes around the ruck, if I held up another I wanted them to move it wide. I would base it on how the defence was lined up. It was a great way to get the kids to look at what was in front of them.


I remember back when we first started to get Australian players over after the lifting of the international ban. I think it was Grothe who was interviewed and said that he was coached to finish a move from anywhere on the pitch - coached. What we tend to think of as "spontaneous" actually isn't. When someone makes a break the rest of the team have a pattern to expoit it and finish it. Good teams are better at this and the one thing you can say about Australian teams is that if you give them a sniff they are extremely efficient at converting it. And I would say that a big reason for that efficiency is because they have to play against less generous defensive structures.

re dhm's posts , yes 3 yrs but was he always planning cuthbo and garbutts arrival?

low scores, was 98 the godden try match ? I remember beating widnes at fartown with no tries

imagine grothe running at achurch

The four most pertinent words in describing Leeds attacking struggles this season.

How many times have we seen a player take the ball to the line with genuine options of who to hit with the pass? They've either got one (or no) runners with them offering a viable passing option, or the alternative to go on their own.

Now either Leeds aren't working on attacking shapes and structures in the week because they don't have the fit bodies to do so, or they are and the players either aren't listening or aren't able to convert it into being in the right places at the right time to run them during games.

Compare and contrast with the likes of Cas and Wigan, who seem to be operating within a structure that gives the half-backs options running off the ball and the opportunity to play what they see in front of them within that structure.

Totally agree.

You might be mixing up structure with a lack of application on defence. While on attack in the Saints match I wouldn't say the tries from Golding, Burrow and Keinhorst (2nd) were easy to defend against!

Looking at the tries conceded our defence is still very much a joke. I don't care how many injuries we have, or who is on the field, some of the feeble efforts (in particular players not even getting into a position to defend) are appalling.

I'd also add that Golding should never have been asked to take the drive on our line that led to Sts try. A heads up play from the acting half would have been a dummy and run for himself, not passing to one of the smallest players in a position where all that would happen is him getting mullered.

This is the most annoying thing for me, the defensive structure is all over the shop and has been since Widnes away. Its been mentioned a lot but the ruck is really terrible and needs fixing up badly.As poor as our attack has been for the most part, if we had been better in this area we wouldn't be down where we are right now imo.

What struck me was that all it took for Sts to break the line was a smaller player to run towards the Leeds defence then stop and start again. The defence looked like it was playing musical statues.

As an aside a friend at work watched the full game yesterday and he was raving about Lilley. Mind you as a Sharks fan for the past few years he has been watching Jeff Robson at 7.

Its selfish defending, or at least self-preserving defending that is costing us
Players are pushing off far too early and asking far too much of their inside man, often overcommitting to an outside threat
Worrying thing is its players who are usually quite reliable in defence, there has been a lot of time this season when I have been shouting 'where is he going!' in Ablets direction, who seams to think his inside defenders are superhuman