Although I completely agree with what you've said here Sal, I think you're missing the point of many, I don't for one minute believe the majority want sinfield in the team for his playing ability, it's more his onfield management/organisation, which is without doubt, what we missed yesterday and for that second half against Huddersfield.

They just didn't seem fired up yesterday and lacked a bit of effort at times to be honest, if we're not going to be organised or make the right decisions with sinfield not on the pitch at pivotal points in games, the least we need is a bit more hunger and hardwork, which isn't coming IMO

Ridiculous post. I can't remember us ever going unbeaten for a season, with KS playing a perfect game every week, in the past either.
I can remember us winning 6 GFs plus the challenge cup, LLS and WCC on more than one occasion under his leadership though.

When the team were playing very well I'd imagine they didn't need Sinfield's leadership. Now they certainly do, not even mentioning his goal kicking.

I've heard said "we need to learn to play without him". Well, aside from the fact that we don't, he's a Rhinos player the rest of this year and 2015 is not a dress rehearsal for 2016, don't we need to learn to play without Peacock?

It's lunacy that he isn't in the 13 (forget the bench) if he's fit. He's needed, fairly desperatley given the last few performances.

Could not have put it better myself.

Let's hope McDermott is man enough to swallow his stubborn pride

You have missed my point - I have given you three examples of his on-field game management, all three incidents were situations that were completely within his control and he didn't make the correct decision. The idea that when he returns he will be Sinfield circa 2010 isn't born out by the evidence on the field. Less said about the WC semi final the better.

Do you honestly think his being on the field is going to change the attitude and quality of play of the likes of Peacock, Burrow, Handley, Aiton, Singleton, Achurch - seriously?

Come on Sal, No one has claimed that he plays the perfect game or that he doesn't make mistakes. What many of us argue is that whilst he is still a Rhinos player we should utilise his game management and leadership skills. Whilst recognising that he is not as sharp as he was a few years back, I still believe that on balance we are a better team with him in the 17.

Bit harsh blaming him for Tom Briscoe's backside falling out against Catalans.

Errrrm sal.......... Two of those examples we're playing errors, not the game management/leadership/organisational skills 90% of us are talking about.

Sutty also seems to have a better run of form when he's been left out for a couple of games too, which is another reason I'd be bringing sinfield back in for at least a couple if weeks. Look at it this way, we keep things as they are and carry on loosing, or we do what the fans seem to want and being sinfield back in and if we lose then still, the fans got it wrong and there can be no complaints.

So Sinfield is being cast aside to 'move on'.

When will JP be getting the same treatment?

I would suggest throwing a pass on your own line with a minute to go wasn't great game management?

No they are examples of very poor decision making there is a huge difference between a missed tackle and a seriously dumb play in the dying seconds of a knock out game

Considering it was McGuires dumb play that put us in the position at the end in that Catalans game, are you now writing him off too Sal?

I'd write McGuire off as captain for getting entangled in handbags at dawn when he should have been making a tackle on Sunday!

McGuire has his failings I can see that - pity some on here you included seem unable to see Sinfield's issues. It was a seriously dumb play defended if you must but no one in their right mind is going to put that play on in those circumstances.

McGuire and quite a few others would never have tried to run it from dummy half there. On the goalline, right on the sideline so both markers knew he could only go one way, the most likely result would've been forced back for a drop out. It was only a bad play because Briscoe turned it into one, the pass was as straightforward as you could hope for and one you'd catch 99 times out of 100.

You shouldn't let the end result of a play determine whether is was the right or wrong choice. Had Sinfield gone himself and conceded a drop out from which Catalans scored I'm sure you'd have been saying he was dumb not passing to Briscoe who is a strong carrier of the ball.

It was the wrong play, even if he runs from dummy half and Catalan force a drop out, with a minute on the clock it eats the time up.

I was stood in absolute disbelief that he'd even attempted the flat pass there at that point, there's so many more risks with that play that running it.

Bad plays do not however, take away from what I said we were missing, onfield management and organisation. Players are going to make the wrong decisions, but one error 99/100 does not lose you a match, where as poor discipline, a lack of organisation and a poor work ethic for 50 minutes of a game will!

Their was just over a minute and 40 secs on the clock, even with a slow walk to take the drop out they'd have gotten over a minute and a full set of six at us. If Briscoe takes the pass which he should've done and we get through our set and put a kick in that would've left Catalans a lot less time and further to travel.

Yes but way up the risks, you make a flat pass, Briscoe knocks on and Catalan score/ briscoe takes the pass and gets dragged over for a dropout anyway. You eliminate the knock on if you run from dummy half, which is already one less risk.

You take the knock on out of the equation and you have the same possible outcomes, so why take the risk with the knock on involved? Even if it's a drop out, it's what another 30/40 seconds maybe if we're lucky? At least we could have set up well to defend, we'd have had a much greater chance at that over what happened.

Were you honestly thinking to yourself at that play of the ball 'pass it' because I know I certainly wasn't and I'd expect anyone watching the game with a bit of awareness to have been expecting him to run, obviously in the game with all the adrenaline and what not, your decision can be effected so I'm not slating him for it, but as a spectator and if I'm brutally honest it was definitely the wrong play.

Please don't forget I am all for sinfield coming back into the side, I disagree with the people (sal) that don't think we could use him right now or that it wouldn't be better for us, but my opinion on that play is that it was definitely wrong aha

Briscoe running onto the ball had more chance of getting us away from the line than Sinfield running from dummy half (which isn't exactly a strong point for him) with the markers and other defenders rushing in to help push him back knowing he could only go left. How far do you honestly Sinfield would've gone? Tackled same spot if lucky but unlikely. Had the tackle been several yards further infield with the possibility that he could run either side of the PTB then yes he should do that. If the pass was too far then again bad idea. But it was simple as you like, Briscoe just messed up.

I'm still going to argue......... He makes 2 yards maximum but the next pass is easier to take because it's not flat

You continue to (inadvertently?) use the wrong 'their' by the way.

It is a puzzle why McDermott selects Sinfield in the 19 only to not appear in the final 17. It must mean he doesn't even figure in the training field moves integral to any match day tactics?!?
Maybe Sinfield[u is[/u being saved for the CC to give him the best chance of a more fancied second winner's medal

We don't like players throwing passes across the line in our 20 throwing a pass on your own line in any circumstances is crazy. It is not the % play especially if you are leading with <two minutes to go. He should have had enough experience to take the ball and get to ground. Briscoe is a strong runner from dummy half with some space - how much space is he going to have after Sinfield had passed him the ball? - it was a seriously dumb play and a poor example of game management.

The reason Peacock hasn't been given a reduced role in the team and Sinfield has is despite his age Peacock continues to make 150m an 30 tackles a game, and is still one of the best props in the competition. Sinfield's non-selection is as much about his performance levels prior to his injury as it is about his up coming departure. His body doesn't seem to be able to keep up with his brain anymore, and I think it's something he recognises as much as anyone at the club. However, he should still be in the 17 somewhere IMO, but his days of being the lynchpin of the side seem to be all but done.

Bingo Bongo

Spot on Charlie.