I dare say he does, but those that seem to believe theres systemic issues, even given the results I feel are far wide of the mark. Leeds have 2 games in hand, Wakey and Widnes, both winable and would take Leeds joint top yet still people aren't happy.

Re the issue you had with Watkins at FB, maybe BM doesn't want to play Watson, (whos played something like 5 games against grown men) in a key position whilst also meaning he'd have to play Vickery and the inexperienced lad together.

Put it this way I can't ever see a coach at a SL side, be it scholarship, 19s or first team reading RLfans and saying "yeah good point, i'll try that!"

That would be pretty close-minded then...... never a good trait.

Why does he have to play Vickery?

Regarding the above I personally think that SO FAR this season has been an improvement. The defence appears
To have improved no end.
And yes we are not that far off the top I personally don't have a problem with Watkins at full back, but again personally would prefer to see another option on the wing instead of vickery.

Or deluded for a 'fan' of the game on a message board to believe they could offer anything, the coaches have all the experience they have plus the relevant information to hand, training etc and you think 'your' opinions from the 'stands' carry any weight?

Most suggestions ive seen indicate Watkins and Vickery playing on the right.

The defence has been a joy to watch...and I mean that. (Pity about the recent two 'soft' tries against Bradford though) .. Just need to get that attack working more slickly now. Roll on the (hopefully) harder grounds......and the return of Hardaker and BJB.

For every decision that is made there are a number of influencing factors that are not seen from the 'stands'.

Seth I am sure you're right.... but I see this forum as nothing more than an extension of being a supporter at the ground with all its inherent speculation, 'knowledge' and rapport.

More should do so IMO, rather than acting arrogantly, supersiliously or perhaps a little too seriously in their postings.

I think we should also remember that most on here were slagging off BJB`s defensive abilities not too long ago.
Granted his attacking skills are tons better than Vickerys. Then again I dont think Ablett has passed the ball to Vickery yet.
As for our forwards we will have to use Clarkson for Delaney and Singleton for Kirke.
Hopefully Kylie`s fit to replace Bailey .
We can then see how good our squad is compared to the likes of Wigans.

Its the tone of some posts that are damning of decisions/the system that appear some genuinly beleive they are well placed to feel they could make more well informed decisions, it defies belief to me. Your posts do actually make me smile as you're pretty accepting of this regardless of your sometimes wild ideas

Leeds aren't joint top though, they are currently in 7th having played two games more at home than away.

The games in hand are winnable for sure but they are far from a guaranteed four points at this stage. The only points you can count on are those that are already in the bag. There is no upside that I can see in having two games in hand - the games will have to be played at some point in an already crowded fixture list with Leeds I imagine aiming up for the missing piece of silverwear for this group of otherwise highly decorated players.

If any sacrificial offerings are needed for the bigger goals it's likely to come in the shape of ordinary league games against the likes of a competitive Wakefield or even an inspired Widnes - whenever they're squeezed into the calender - where would that leave Leeds then? I'd suggest more or less where they are now.



Makes you wonder why the coaches choose to sit in them then.

What's wrong with supporters discussing what they see going on and questioning decisions that were made with the benefit of hindsight. I doubt they do so believing for one millisecond any views expressed will be seen let alone have any influence on any decisions made up at Headingley.

It won't nor should it, it's just a bunch of fans doing their own post-match amateur analysis while scoring points with and/or against each other - nothing more.

__________

At the Catalans game McShane replaced Peacock on 29 mins. This appeared to push Jones-Buchanan up to acting prop. Around twenty seconds later Jones-Buchanan took a supposed hit up except he ran laterally, made no ground whatsoever and coughed up possession (fortunately Leeds retained the ball from the spill) he looked physically spent at that moment - out on his feet. At the end of the set he can't get down the field on the kick trailing behind on the chase. In the set that followed the kick Jones-Buchanan, Ablett and Delaney were all at sea and bust easily right up the middle of the park by a pass to Bosc. McGuire this time made the covering tackle and swept up the danger with an intercept of sorts.

My question is - why was the unused Moore not the man to replace Peacock after his first stint? A prop for a prop rather than pushing Jones-Buchanan over the stamina cliff so soon after a huge effort V Bradford.

Is McDermott really happy with the squad at his disposal?

Those games against wakey and widnes I'm sure would have seen Leeds much closer to the top of the table with either a slender 2 points in it or being level, whilst also adding Leeds have already beaten cats away, Wigan and saints this year with much improved defence. I never said there was an upside, just that I choose to see it that other sides have had the benefit of competing for 4 extra points than Leeds and that I believe these would have seen them much closer if not top of the table, had they have played those games I'd bank on it they would not be where they are now.

I'd think you could differentiate between what I said in my earlier post and what you said re fans 'discussing' the game.

Hindsight would show the coach was 'right' as Leeds went in at half time 10-0 up and also looked the dominant side in the last quarte and coming away with the win.

You know what I meant saying 'sat in the stands' and it was nothing to do with the location of the coach.

Re your last point, exactly what I said earlier, there are numerous factors that go into decisions being made that from the 'stands' (as a fan!!) may not make sense, but then they see a fraction of the information that goes into them.

To put some context into why I think the above, I've had a number of occassions where I've made decisions when coaching that others have initially looked sideways at me for, when fully explained more often than not they've completely seen my reasoning why, as they previously didn't have the relevant knowledge/info to hand. It's for this reason that I put some context into my thoughts from 'the side lines'.

And just to reiterate, I think you can differentiate between what I said earlier and purely discussing opinions.

As a completely uneducated fan looking on from the outside and voicing an opinion, McDermott's strategy seemed to be about getting as much mobility onto the field as possible for the closing part of each half. Presumably the idea was to exploit any tired legs from a Catalans side who had also played Thursday night and had to travel home from London.

Given that Leeds finished much the fresher (in the second half in particular) it's hard to argue with the calls that the coaching and conditioning staff made in the days leading up to the game and during the 80 minutes itself.

As a completely uneducated fan you were questioning Peacock's mobility for the last few seasons. I am therefore surprised you wuld agree that a 35 year old Peacock, playing his second lengthy spell with little rest in four days, would be more mobile than Moore who had spent an hour on the bench.

Peacock has many wonderful attributes. Mobility isn't one of them. He can be counted on to concede at least one penalty a match for a high shot as a result of his lack of mobility whether he is rested or fatigued.

Good point and he's not alone, JJB gives away shed loads of pens, some are because he's daft, others because he plays too many mins.

Does this lack of forwards mean Hunslet will have to cancel their game.

Nice one

Swings and roundabouts.

While you don't get mobility with Peacock, you get a lot of graft and leadership. Take him off for someone more energetic, but with equally poor lateral movement and a tendency not to respect possession as much, and while you might gain on some fronts you'll lose on others.

It certainly helped Leeds catching Les Catalans putting in a flat display unable to capitalise on their opportunities.

I asked about the logic behind a specific choice of interchange at a specific point. I pointed out how Jones-Buchanan appeared far away from being capable of stepping up to prop at that point, a zero carry and lost possession, a poor energy kick chase, a yawning gap left straight up the guts in defence - while a fresh prop was left unused on the bench.

Yes ultimately the win is all that matters and it allows legitimate concerns over decisions taken to be side-stepped.

From what I remember Leeds had Kirke, Achurch, JJB, Bailey and sinfield (13?), and Delaney didn't come of til 34th min(?) in the pack at that point, so I'm not sure JJB was pushed up to prop, rather taking some work closer to the middle. Maybe BM wasn't convinced adding Moore to Kirke (who's limited going forward) and Achurch (who's had a mixed start) without having the workrate of Delaney and JJB. I also don't recall JJBs contribution to be so poor that he'd should desperately come off. Should Sinfield have also been pulled off when he knocked on 3 times? Sometimes it's also easy to isolate 1 or 2 poor reads to try justify a point too.

Ok I've watched it again and your recollection is out of proportion.

Yes he initially goes across looking for a gap running from out wide, poor read though fatigue or not it happens.

Nothing greatly wrong with the kick chase, ball was on the opposite side of the field and there were another 5 more players within a metre or 2 of JJB yet you picked out him to emphasise your point.

For the line break JJB was at A defender and had Blanch stepped back to the ruck he was well positioned, however blanch ran and overs line catching out our B and C defender with McGuire desperately getting into the next available space. C Defender is at fault as he's looking in all the time and loses his hips.

Also what about his kick chase 5 mins later on the 34th minute or the line speed to stop Blanch making another dangerous carry in the same set, didn't look tired then.

...Also first man on the kick chase on 38th minute.

I refuse to become an RLfans bore!

Too late!



Keep it up.

Careful, arguing with fekkwitts on here can become addictive. I've cut right back these days but the urge is still there.

Cheers lads, I think I'm coming out in acne and greasy hair to match

Leuluai for Bailey and Hardaker for Vickery the only squad changes announced for the Wire game. Hardaker might play on the wing if he's being eased back?

Imagine Clarkson will come in for Delaney if he's not fit, otherwise as you were.

McShane replacing Peacock was Leeds' second substitution. When he came on the Leeds forwards at that point were Burrow, Jones-Buchanan, Delaney and Ward from the starting set with the introduction of Kirke and McShane off the bench.

If Jones-Buchanan wasn't pushed up to prop when McShane was introduced then who was?



Poor read through fatigue it appeared to be as was the inability to retain possession. Forget watching the ball after it's spilt watch Jones-Buchanan scraping himself off the floor, getting back behind his team-mates and the laboured kick chase that followed.



You emphasise my point re the tired kick chase by noting the kick chases towards the end of the half that followed after the introduction of Achurch for Ward and the return of Bailey for Delaney. That's why I noticed how much he was struggling when pushed up to prop as you exect to see him leading the chase not bringing up the stragglers.



Agreed poor defence as a group which is why I included Ablett and Delaney in my original comment rather than isolate Jones-Buchanan who was the least of the three to blame on that one.



He didn't lead the chase in the 34th minute but he was getting back on track by then having caught his second wind and pushing through the wall. He only lasted the opening three or four minutes in the second half though (even after having a break) before being replaced by Peacock - so the tank must have been well drained by his standards.

Why push anyone to that extent when you have a fresh man on the bench though?



The board needs someone to pick up the slack when Juan disappears.