After he was subbed Delaney looked done in walking off. Ran his blood to water. What did he have, a 5 minute break on the sidelines before coming back on? He ran back on like a 6 year old. Machine.

It was both but Keith made the transition first and probably was more suited to the prop position than his twin.

____________

While Jones-Buchanan was losing the plot somewhat around the thirty minute mark, coach McDermott had Achurch and Ward yet to be introduced to the game.

It's all well and good keeping 100% ers out there but not when the effort becomes mis-directed probably in part through fatigue. A good coach would recognise the issue and make the change.

"Lazy" is not a word I associate with Delaney the odd mistake yes which I can except. Are you saying the subs that do short stints never a make a mistake or get fatigue? Delaney is immense most weeks with little rest, are you suggesting the coach change this successful tactic?

Mistake free performances would be wonderful but it is unrealistic to expect this from the 100 per like JP, JJB and Delaney who push the boundaries. Perhaps you would prefer Kirke to come on for Delaney with his usual mistake free game?

JJB rush of blood was not due to fatigue. In fact for about 10 minutes after the thirty minute mark he rushed about with great energy hitting every Wigan player in sight

So according to your game plan you would then have subbed JJB.....so he would not have been on to score his try!



This idea that we should keep our best players off the field is bizarre. You have said you would play McShane ahead of Burrow and now it appears you would also prefer to see less game time for our 100 per!

Just as well we have a good coach who knows his players.

I thought he had to come back on due to Ablett's "retirement" after Farrell's attack to his kidney region.
Otherwise I believe he'd have stayed off for the rest of the game, having earned for his previous all-round efforts - Farrell's try excepted.

He conceded two penalties in quick succession both for high tackles. The first immediately following a blow-up seemingly aimed towards the referee although for what remains unclear as there appeared no obvious Wigan infringement. High tackles are very often the result of a loss of technique due to fatigue. Having a fresh player on at that stage (Wigan were arguably getting on top at this point) could have prevented those from occurring or are you happy to see indiscipline and dissent coming from Leeds players.



In what way would substituting Jones-Buchanan around the thirty minute mark have prevented him from scoring his try in the fifty-eigth minute ? In this code players replaced can act as replacements themselves and having spelled him I would have given him a second stint.



It's not about keeping anyone off the field it's about maximising their effort while on it.

It's doubtful a genuine hooker would have delivered the quality of ball from dummy half that Burrow produced in the twentieth and thirty-eigth minute.

JC ,These 100% ers would be knackered by september if they aren't managed properly and rotated on a regular basis.
What happens if/when they get injured and all we have is back up that's only playing 10 minute stints?
Also last week against the Giants Delaney AND Jjb were knackerd with at least 30 minutes to go so to expect so much week in week out is ridiculous when they have more than capable replacements on the bench in the shape of Ward and Moore and when he can drag a reasonable performance out Kirke.
I know for you our Coach never makes a wrong call and those of us that suggest something different "lack the coaching acumen" you like to declare you posess.
Sometimes just sometimes the Coach could imo and others utilise his squad and selections better its not about sacking anyone or a hanging at Dawn nor do we need a history lesson on what the players or coaches have achieved just that maybe in some cases an earlier change or different selection may actually help the team.
Now whether you agree is your choice but i and others are as entitled to a valid opinion as you are whether we agree or not.

Indeed some do need a history lesson.

For the last two seasons, the online experts have banged on about how the coach is overworking the senior players and how they'll have nothing left in the tank.

For the last two seasons, the team has played arguably its best rugby in the playoffs, when it should - according to the online experts - be out on its feet.

That's a history lesson right there.

Why don't you save "McDermott knows best" and cut and paste it to each of your responses? Would save you a lot of time typing.

I think it's a very worthy observation that two of our better peroformers on friday made errors during phases of the game when players that could have covered their positions sat kicking their heels on the bench.

Let's be honest, the coaches use of his bench is not a new topic of discussion. The coach himself felt the need to defend his tactics publicly last year after a few games using 16 players.

And it's not just the "internet experts that are making noises". It's members of our own first team that are doing likewise.

My answer to you showed clearly that JJB was not fatigued after 30 minutes as he had a very busy next 10 minutes and his penalties had nothing to do with fatigue but more to do with anger at what he though a poor decision from the ref. While not excusing him he certainly was full of running. So 30 + 10 = 40 and if you then felt he needed subbing he would have missed his try QED!

We do not have genuine hookers anymore tvoc. We have not needed hookers for years. We now have an extra half back whose runs from the acting half position regularly devastate the opposition and his contribution playing at 9 has been as important as any other player in winning our big games. You can pursue your anti-Burrow campaign all you like but he remains one of our key players that if selected should remain on the field for the full 80. It fits the coaches game plan which produced a rare win against Wigan. Which I may say would not have happened had the coach gone with your team selection and substitute advice.

Like they were last year?




Was this in the period when the "knackered" JJB scored that vital try with speed power and change of direction?




No you don't know that and I have never said he doesn't make a wrong call. All you know is that I present an alternative opinion when IMO unfair negative comments flow forth when you and the other members of your Mutual Back Slappers Club press the SACMAC button on your keypads. I bet you have an IBM.......I Blame McDermott





Well it certainly used to be about sacking Mac. Having lost that argument you now seek to immediately blame the coach for everything and anything. Now if a player makes a mistake then oh he has fatigue and should have been substituted. Some of the same moaners were saying the coach shouldn't have had the subs on just after half time in the WCC... he can't win with you lot can he?

Of course you are entilted to your opinion but likewise I am entitled to point out when your opinions are invalid (IMO of course)

Try to look on the brightside rhinoms - we have just beaten Wigan and Saints away doing it the iMac way

The fatigue in question could have been either physical or mental or both. The outburst aimed at the referee for no apparent offence and the unprofessional chuntering in the general direction of the referee after conceding a penalty would be indicative of a player struggling to keep his emotions in check. Mental fatigue.

Very busy but was it very effective? Conceding two penalties and attempting an ill-judged offload in quick succession suggested a player making poor judgements again indicative of mental fatigue.



How so?

He would have been spelled for the final ten (as soon as there were signs of his effort becoming counter-productive) and returned for the final twenty-five or so - QED he would have been on the field at the time of his try.



That's not my point and never has been. Name me one other team that defends it's hooker inbetween centre and wing. Even Leeds don't do this except when accommodating Burrow.



I wasn't aware I was running one.



Impossible to say. Leeds won narrowly this week but lost heavily last week with Burrow starting at hooker. They may have won both tricky home games (or lost both) had McShane started with Burrow introduced from the bench to wreak havoc against tiring forwards in and around the ruck. We'll never know - that's right neither of us.

Burrow has backed up breaks and dropped two passes this season he'd have devoured in the past. Fatigue (mental or physical) from playing exclusively out of dummy half when these incidents occurred?

_____



As rhinoms is referencing the Huddersfield game where Leeds' only try was scored by a genuine hooker I'd guess the simple answer to your question would be no.

So you are a keyboard Doctor, a keyboard Phyciatrist as well as a keyboard coach are you? impressive





How convenient. As you are so good with your predictions.......perhaps you can tell us your timings for subbing JJB, Delaney and Burrow for the next few matches?



Name me another team that is the SL Champions and last years WC Champions and RLCup finalists without this format?



Did you forget Burrow started when we won for at Saints for the first time in ages or would that not help your point?



Or perhaps he has stress caused by all those wanting him to spend time on the bench Dr tvoc But if you take your white coat and bottle top glasses off you may also consider it is just he has not reached his top form yet. Something you achieve with match practice as evidenced by a his improved display against Wigan.



Nobody has a "genuine hooker" any more. I guess you mean old style or inside the box style thinking from your Observer book of Rugby 1st edition.

Some good figures from the weekend game. 39 tackles, 3 misses and 128m gained.
There were other good figures from the Leeds pack. People seem to be a bit down on JJB but he made 38 tackles with no misses

Was this in the period when the "knackered" JJB scored that vital try with speed power and change of direction?

When did this happen against the GIANTS then??

Well it certainly used to be about sacking Mac. Having lost that argument you now seek to immediately blame the coach for everything and anything. Now if a player makes a mistake then oh he has fatigue and should have been substituted. Some of the same moaners were saying the coach shouldn't have had the subs on just after half time in the WCC... he can't win with you lot can he?

That was 2 yrs ago and no its not about blaming the coach for "everything" and i never have done either and i've also mentioned individual player performances on numerous occasions but again that's not on in your book either is it?
As for the WCC comment i congratulated the team/coaches on a great effort in a hard fought game and only mentioned individual performances as a matter of discussion when only Mcshane was getting the blame on here by many you included BTW!

Of course you are entilted to your opinion but likewise I am entitled to point out when your opinions are invalid (IMO of course)

Try to look on the brightside rhinoms - we have just beaten Wigan and Saints away doing it the iMac way

Finally its great that we bounced back and beat ST's and Wigan and showed some real improvement and determination not to the repeat the slumps of the previous 2 years and kudos to all involved for that does that mean we can't suggest things or discuss what else we may think help the team??

Just shrug your shoulders and move on JC, otherwise you'll just get stuck in the same circular arguments every week.

Or alternatively give a sarcastic response which obviously proves you correct and everyone else's opinion invalid eh AG???

What about the online expert who declared last season that Leeds weren't good enough to win any silverwear that year?

Ooooooops.

I think that it further emphasises that despite the wide variances in understanding of the game displayed on board, even the most knowledgeable posters only understand a fraction of what the people who work in the job do.

Doesn't mean that the pros are wrong sometimes, often either, but they make decisions based on a much larger base of knowedge

Relevance?

Do you accept the concept of mental as well as physical fatigue? Do you accept that getting frustrated at what appeared a correct play-on call by the referee, showing emotion, losing control of your actions are all signs of a player going through a difficult patch?

You'll have noted McDermott's comments re Jones-Buchanan on the SL Fulltime broadcast on Sunday night? Those are comments I would endorse.



Relevance?

As I don't pick the team it would be difficult to set that out in advance in the context you are seeking. I could waste my time telling you what I would do if I were running the team but as I'm not what would be the point as my starting and bench selections are unlikely to replicate the actual. Feel free to do so if you so wish.



Relevance? People will note rather than answer a straight-forward question re naming any other team that defends with their starting hooker between centre and wing - you either can't or won't.

The discussion is on how best to use Burrow.

But to address your diversion directly - In the last two season's Leeds have won Grand Finals with Burrow starting at hooker and with Burrow off the bench, in the last two season's Leeds have lost Challenge Cup Finals with Burrow starting at hooker and with Burrow off the bench and in the last two WCC matches Leeds have both won and lost with Burrow starting hooker.

While not conclusive in itself Burrow's unanimous vote as Harry Sunderland winner came in the 2011 Grand Final and saw him in the role I think best suits his talents - being introduced from the bench after the initial softening up period, operating at first receiver alongside a genuine hooker but with a licence to jump in at dummy half and scoot looking to make cheap metres and/or tackle busts and/or clean breaks.



Why would I forget, I didn't.

Leeds have played seven games this season (five of those at Headingley) winning four and losing three - Burrow has been the starting hooker in every one of them. The sequence of results so far in 2013: W, L, W, L, W, L, W

Burrow has had an influence in all just as other players have also, I could claim had he started off the bench the wins would have been more comfortable and some of the losses could have been averted - but I don't. What you can't claim though is that Leeds would be unbeaten if Burrow had started every week - he has and Leeds aren't. The results don't lie.



Perhaps he's bothered by comments absolute nobodies post on a message board ..... really ? Seriously, really ?

Do you mean an improved personal performance or do you mean an improved team result? Care to quantify this improvement in his game V Wigan?



That's right you're guessing.

Perhaps I've never explained what I mean by 'genuine hooker' in the context of Burrow's use in the starting role at Leeds, ie 2012 onwards - and I'm a little surprised that I have to. By genuine I mean one who directs play from dummy-half and defends around the ruck area in the centre third of the field.

Burrow is still learning the former and not tasked in the other. It's a unique solution to accommodate an individual for the time he's on the field as starting hooker. I'd argue it's disruptive to the defensive formations used at Leeds and at times causes confusion and a potential weak spot when McGuire and Burrow end up alongside each other defending on the same edge - this never really happened when they were the starting halves together.

Furthermore the player who arguably is starting to suffer is Kevin Sinfield. He publicly spoke of his desire to play stand-off in order to be able to give of his best for the longest amount of time. That to me was a plea for a reduced defensive load as with ball in hand he was effectively operating in the halves anyway. People may note that (according to Opta) in 2010 he was averaging 27.95 tackles per game in the Regular rounds - this figure fell to 19.44 in 2011 and remained constant with 19.93 in 2012. It has now risen to 26.17 on the evidence of the opening six Regular Round Leeds games in 2013.

Is it right if Sinfield is the one tasked to pick up the slack caused by starting with Burrow at hooker. Doesn't Sinfield shoulder enough of the responsibility as it is ?

Although some will like to imply I'm anti-Burrow - I'm sure others can decide that for themselves - he's in my seventeen but I think this is not the role he's best suited to and that the team performance is and will continue to suffer until a trusted genuine hooker replacement for Diskin/Buderus/Lunt is found. It's in no-way Burrow's fault or responsibility to do that - the solution is higher up.

Well said TVOC. I agree with all you state about having a 'proper' hooker who can defend in the middle and the best utilisation of the talented, but yet most unlikely forward imaginable Burrow

Or the online expert who has been declaring Peacock finished for the last few years?

Good to see that tvoc is still the most objective and knowledgeable poster on this site. The Burrow next to McGuire in defence is a big weakspot. Burrow off the bench to get at those tired forwards, from either 1st receiver or dummy half if it's on. That's his best position IMO.

Awesome post from Tvoc!

Delaney in the Exiles team?