i apologise for that comment,i did mean factual in the sense about my comments on the standards of the stadium.i originally joined in this thread,because of a comment that headingley is the best ground in super league.i disagree with that comment.i also stated that treatment of away fans is awful.we are paying to watch the same game,in diffrent degrees of comfort.

well thanks for that info,next time we will get in the south stand,unless the stewards send us round to the away end again.

I'm sure if you bought a South Stand ticket you could go in. Just as I can no longer go in the South Stand with my Paddock season ticket, unless I get a ticket for that area. If you buy a ticket for the Western Terrace that is where you can stand.

Back on topic though...I like the look of the new place.
Just hope the building goes without a hitch and minimum disruption. Not holding my breath though.

cheers.it looks impresive,hope it happens.good luck for the rest of the season.

As do we all. On your original point about the West terrace, it is a past its sell by date facility I guess the weather is a major factor in whether it is an enjoyable experience. Unfortunately at the moment there are no plans to rebuild or cover that area, but as has been said, tickets for The East, North and Southstand are open to away fans to buy. Enjoy the rest of your season

You don't pay £20 for a bit of genocide though



Headingley is an embarrassment for club that has been as successful as Leeds have over the past 10 years. Wooden seats in your premier enclosure is what I would have expect 30/40 years ago.

Leeds fans can defend it all you want but its a disgrace for an elite sporting club. The players get all the luxuries but the fans who pay for the players get third rate facilities.

Hopefully the new development will put right what has needed putting right for decades

Strong parallels with modern day Britain

. Topical.

FWIW I wasn't taking issue with the sentiment contained in the OP, just felt the point was being made in a slightly melodramatic way.

I would happily sit in a wooden seat than give back even one of the trophies we have won over the last 10 years, so if the money was invested in the players I am more than willing to except it.

I take your point but your sentiment is potentially an issue in the game. It simply doesn't raise sufficient income as Leeds are now finding out. The club hasn't generated sufficient income to invest in both its facilities and its team. The standards on the field are the lowest in the history of SL because the game here cannot compete financially with the NRL or RU for the very essence of the game the players.

Everything is very short term its about survival now and not prosperity in the future. If you don't invest in the fabric of your business it will have a limited life span.

The club generates more income and more profit than ever before. Of course income isn't as high as it should be. That's a consequence of the game bankrupting itself and a lack of investment decades ago. Don't forget how long it took Leeds, the richest club in the northern hemisphere, to get out of debt.

The standards on the field are higher than at any point in the history of SL. It may not be as good to watch but the actual quality is undeniably higher. To claim the standard of play is lower than that of 1996 is ludicrous.

its almost certainly higher than '96. Simply in terms of physicality it is unquestionably higher. But 5 years ago? 10 years ago? well...

Minimum Standards? Headingley meets and exceeds every single minimum standard ever proposed so that is irrelevant. No other ground which was around when Framing the Future was proposed meets every single criteria specified in that document. Leeds actually went though and made sure the ground met them.

FWIW neither Framing the Future nor any of the various Super League licence criteria mention wooden seats anywhere (and I will be very reluctant to relinquish mine when the time comes). But Headingley ticks all the boxes regardless.

any other ground that was around at that time has long since been demolished and rebuilt/moved.putting seats on the north terrace and an extension on the stand roof which restricts the view for the seats already there.it may have met minimum standards,but it used to host international games etc,etc.there is a reason that stopped.if your happy sitting on those uncomfortable seats,then good luck to you.have a look at whats on offer at the other venues and say its still as good.people want value for money.i first went to headingley in 1977,not sure when i will go back again.i am not here to insult anyone,just what i thought on my latest vist.

When was the last time Headingley was sold out/full for a game?

The quality is nowhere near what it was 2000-2005 - the lack of basic skills i.e. passing, catching, kicking, tackling is miles off what they used to be. The players may be faster and bigger but that doesn't make them better. I would suggest the quality has been on a serious slide since the increase in the cap in the NRL in 2013.

Not sure what you are watching every week to come out with that statement. Couldnt' be further from the truth.

You are right on 1996. But between 2000 and 2013, the game was far far superior over here than what we have now, and of a much higher quality.

How do you measure standards?

How do you measure "what is good to watch" - it is a subjective measure.

I suspect we've all got different opinions. In my view the game in each era had good and bad features. These features made it better or worse to watch depending on your point of view. For instance I think the game now is less entertaining because of the obsession with the ruck.

Is the game at a standard now than ever? I think we need to agree what we mean before you can argue about it.

Technical competence of the players - today's players are incapable of being able to perform basic skills under pressure. Is there a kicker in SL with skill or vision of a Sean Long or a Paul Deacon?

the games gone away from skill sets to dominate g the wrestle/ruck.
only cad seem to have worked on attacking skills.
the game needs a balance, good defending is good to watch but do is exciting attack.
you see odd bits but nowhere near enough off your seat moments

For me there are two sides to the coin. An absolute judgement and a relative judgement.

I think as an absolute judgement I could accept (though I wouldn't personally agree with it) that the game has improved through the improvement at the bottom. More clubs are no.competitive in more games. My opinion would be this hasn't come from the lower clubs catching up but the top.clibs slowing down.

As a relative measure I can't even see it as a realistic prospect to say SL has improved relative to the NRL.i honestly dont. 5-10 years ago I think the top 2 or 3 clubs in SL could have held their own in the NRL. Maybe not challenged for anytging but been in and around. Now I'm not sure an SL dream team playing in the NRL would be a top 8 side.

I would bet there is more missed tackles per game now than there was in any season of the years 2000 to 2013. Defence hasn't improved for me at all. The poor attacking qualities of teams means they are not testing defences, and yet still simple missed tackles are made.

are there more missed tackles now,due to the games being more competative,thus causing more injuries.which then leads onto the need to blood more inexperienced/younger players.tony smith was interviewed on radio recently and said this is the most competative season since the inception of super league.i personally agree with him.i think this will be of benefit to the england squad when we take on the aussies & kiwis.

Competitive is completely different to quality. Go through any sport with a league, and you will find competitive performances from the same dumbed down rubbish. As Smokey says above, had the bottom teams got better, you might well have had a point, but all that has really happened is the top teams have lowered to match the poorer bottom teams.

Did you think the bottom sides were any good in the same period 2000-2013? so why do you think different now?

It will not aid the England team in the slightest. And as a consequence they will move to get more players around eligibility loopholes so that they can take players from the NRL, to make themselves more competitive.

you may be right,only time will tell.its all opinions.having more young english players,playing more games can only be a positive thing.just my opinion.

you only have to watch this game tonight to see the level of defence teams have these days.