or a blood borne disease, or even something like a blood clot which would see him needing to use a blood thinner making it dangerous to play.

Either way, no interest to me. Best wishes to the lad and looking forward to seeing him playing again soon.

Robbie Ward or Steve Ward could do a job there in place of Aiton.
As long as we dont play Burrow there for the full 80.

Very true. I've a feeling its nothing more than shingles though. It ties in with the 3 months out and the back story. The problem with shingles is that if he plays he can pass it onto other players who haven't had chicken poxs. Also the treatment is steroids for three weeks. However WADA rules dictate you are allowed to take these steroids so long as they see proof of the blood work but the player can't return to play until the steroids have past completely through the system. Standard practise and essentially would be tested weekly until he showed a negative result.

I suspect it's a standard medical application for a WADA banned substance (like the above mentioned shingles treatment, but steroids are used to treat loads of things). Like bewildered says, there are protocols for using these sorts of treatments for athletes under WADA jurisdiction.

If that's the case, I'm sure WADA are informed, and equally sure nobody else needs to be.

What about the 'wanting to know what's up with the players for the team you support' act?

Denis Moran actually!

not sure! But it'll be either the RFL's or Phil Bentham's fault!

I'm so glad you are not my doctor. You have a FEELING it's nothing more than shingles. Well that's okay then, you have a feeling. Plonker

Well Burrow has been a key man and arguably MOM in the last two games - which he wouldn't have been had he had sitting on the bench!

And both games against a poor Wakefield team.
Reckon I would be MOM if I played hooker against them.
Didn't too well against Saints.
Saying that if he can keep up his standard against the better teams then good for him.
Personally would prefer him in the halves or as a back up hooker.
Thought Robbie Ward might have got in the 17 last night.

He was our best attacker against Saints and was 2= best for metres and 2nd best for both carries and tackle busts. His distribution saw Leeds make far more metres than Saints and better field position. Our defeat was not down to Burrow.

I too would prefer him at 7 but he has served us well at 9 and has played the full 80 minutes in the last 3 games. He doesn't deserve the disrespect.

the big problem with burrow at hooker is his passing from the floor is slow and sometimes sloppy. with aiton its crisp and gets wider quicker.

Perhaps he wouldn't but you can't say for certain unless it's against the rules to award a man of the match to someone who starts on the bench - remind everyone where the player who won the Harry Sunderland in 2011 started that game.

You can get away with Burrow at hooker against Wakie. In last fortnight he was afforded plenty of time, due to the benefit of a pack being easily on the front foot and he still didn't make most of the space overall and it isn't pretty to watch. Yes he can dart and run across the line, but he's lacking from a hooking distribution skillset. That's not his fault, he is a scrum half afterall. Think he would be alot happier back at seven too.

Aiton has played well and is an asset to the club and yes his floor pass is better and he makes more tackles. However in all other aspects of the game Burrow is superior. Burrow makes far more dummy runs, carries, metres, tackle busts and clean breaks. Burrow is a proven try scorer and match winner with a kicking game. Burrow does not fit in with some peoples idea of the archetype hooker but his unque individual skills as one of the best attackers in SL make him able to make a success in this role.

In truth Burrow is not that bad at acting half back (2nd choice for England) and as first choice hooker for the leading metre making side last year last year and the current metre leader so far this year his alleged lack of a floor pass has not prevented him from getting good metres out of our forwards and also giving them an all important rest (and the opposition forwards a nightmare) with his many runs from dummy half. This last point is totally overlooked by his detractors.

I have said many time that I would prefer Burrow at 7 but since Buderus left he has stepped up to be our first choice 9 and rarely lets the team down. Some say he should be on the bench but IMO that would be a tragic waste of attacking talent. Maybe in the future but not now because of all our key core players over the last 10 years Burrow is the one that has not lost his speed or had his ability diminished. IMO if fit he should remain on the field for the full 80 as usually he is as full of running in the last minute as in the first.

When Aiton is fit again I would prefer Burrow at 7 as we need his speed in the halfbacks. To give Aiton a break Burrow or Sinfield can cover the 9 spot for 10/15 minutes. So I would not go with a replacement hooker on the bench.

fair points JC. i prefer him at 7 too but he makes a good fist of playing hooker

Irrelevant comment.

My point was he was MOM or close to it in the last 2 games playing the full 80 minutes which few so called hookers can do. In the previous game against Saints he was Leeds's best attacker and at 9 had distributed our forwards to dominate metres and field position again playing the full 80 - remind everyone who was our first choice hooker in 2011 and why he started. We are now talking about 2014 with Aiton out for 3 months.

Our most consistent, fastest attacker should be on the field for the full 80 unless rested or injured

Not Burrow's fault Wakefield were poor. He did enough against Saints (SL leaders with a superb defence) in the distribution skillset to put Leeds in the right field position to win the game. Look at the metres Leeds made last year and this season. That wouldn't be if Burrow was as bad at 9 as you suggest. He more than makes up for the odd poor floor pass by the other skillsets that I have outlined above.

It's not a fair point in any context to measure an hooker on number of carries or dummy half runs he makes. Quite frankly it is a weak point to make, as JC has been told numerous times before.

Hookers are constantly taking the ball from dummy half, as it is their job, so number of carries is determined by how many play the balls the team has. As for dummy half runs, again a complete irrelevant stat unless it is determined by meters gained. You could have your hooker making 40 10 metre runs in a game, making 400 metres in total, but another hooker could put 10 perfectly timed unpredicted passes to a runner, putting him through a gap and contributing to more than 400 metres per game.

Not at all as it was in response to this -



Using Burrow from the bench has been a successful tactic in the past and present and would probably be in the future. The only way using a dynamic Burrow from the bench would not influence the game is if he is kept there for the full eighty in a coach thinking outside the box type nonsensical ploy.

Having one of the better SL back threes on kick returns (Hardaker, Jones-Bishop, Hall - 2013 and Hardaker, Briscoe, Hall - 2014) and a freakish prop (Peacock) making a notable contribution in the overall figures with limited input from the acting half skews that particular stat.

Of course it's not Burrow's fault Wakefield were poor. You can only play what's in front of you.

Leeds metres are mainly made by JP carting it up or from our outside backs.

My critique of Burrow at hooker is accurate.

But you were maligning Burrows top performances because it was only Wakefield.




No not correct. Our forwards have made more metres than the backs so far this season.

Anyway your argument against Burrow at 9 is not consistent or logical. If as you say our outside backs are making good metres (and IMO more effective this year) then credit must go to Burrow at acting half back for shipping the ball out. If as I say that our forwards are making good metres too then this also has to reflect well on Burrow.



So my friend I submit that your critique of Burrow this time is unfair, lacking balance and therefore inaccurate. Whatever next - you'll be saying that Bailey is a good prop I shouldn't wonder!

Like I said earlier, we can't read too much into the Wakefield game. What next Moon at six for the foreseeable? It was an autopilot performance. In first gear mode.



So Burrow is solely credited for this?



Friend? Steady on


Just because I'm not blowing Burrow, doesn't mean its unbalanced. I'm a fan of his and would like to see him where we all know he is more effective. He is a team player who plays there without complaint but we know his preference. I've listed the positive factors he brings to the role, but there are a couple of well documented question marks. What Burrow brings to the hooking role he did anyway within his seven role, picking his moment to up and scoot. Then running or passing. Very effective. Then look in defence, you dont want him tackling, at the moment in this role he's been moved out of the way but only contributes a handful of tackles compared to maybe 30 or so from Aition (or a proper hooker) so you do miss out in other ways.

When was the last time Ryan Bailey missed a tackle, out of interest? Since that time he's made plenty of tackle busts and scored 4 pointers since.

He was our best attacker against Saints and for most of the season so far too. Moon is a quality player and can play centre or at 6



Never said that. But with Burrow as our principal 9 for both last season and this Leeds have been top metre makers so much of the criticism of Burrow at 9 is OTT.



Ok you got me there I admit way over the top






Even the point about Burrow not doing the normal hookers tackling stint is missing the point. Leeds last year were the top tacklers and are 2nd top so far this year so we are not at a disadvantage when playing Burrow out wide on defence. We pick a side to compensate in some areas so that we have a bigger advantage in other areas. My point is that Burrow's alleged deficiencies at hooker are much more than compensated by what else he offers. We both agree that he should be at 7 but my guess is that opposition coaches and forwards would much prefer to see Aiton on the teamsheet that Burrow.



He has missed 3 so far this year - How many games has he played this year?

He has one try so far and his tackle busts are just ahead of his penalties with only Clarkson, Ward and Aiton with worse metres per carry in the forwards