Peacock said he was 'running on empty'. Which just about summed up the team's performance. OK we won and got the 2 points which were badly needed but tonight was the perfect opportuniity to give some of the young lads a chance to show what they are made of. Missed the boat Mac.

He will probably drop BJB next match to assert his authority.

Sinfield was no better defensively in the second half when he played in the middle channel, with Burrow and McGuire defending out wide between the centres and wingers.

Leeds had all their size that would normally have been in the middle playing out wide, which meant some of the smaller players needed to play in the middle. It also meant those who didn't play on Saturday needed to put their hands up and make an extra effort to take more of the workload, in which they failed spectacularly.

I genuinely don't see what Bailey currently offers either at prop or loose forward that Singleton or even Kirke wouldn't. He was absolutely anonymous last night and I can't recall him winning a single collision. The myth about him playing better when his contract is up for renewal seems to have been well and truly shattered, and it's time he saw the exit signs.

The decision on who backed up and who didn't should have been taken out of the players hands IMO. As it was, the likes of Burrow and Ablett didn't seem to show too many signs of fatigue so were probably ok to play. The same can't be said for some of the others. What the situation needed was a coach with the balls to leave players out even if they did put their hands up, and a CEO who would be prepared to back him even if it lead to a defeat. I'm not sure the former believes the latter would happen.

I can see that the Wakey game came at the wrong time. After a few batterings it was important that we got the win to get dome confidence. However a few years ago we were strong enough to win with our academy how times have changed. The fact that fringe players were ignored in favour of playes who had played a couple of days earlier was barmy. Shows how desperate McDermott is really

I think that's a fair summary. He knows that if he didn't snap that run of defeats pretty soon then the noises coming from the fans would make his position untenable and leave Hetherington with no option but to show him the door. Despite what the CEO might have said in the press, it's cheaper and easier to sack a coach rather than try to move on a body of underperforming players.

As a result, he's picking what he considers to be his strongest team week in, week out irrespective of the consequences in terms of player fatigue.

What riles me is McDermotts failure to acknowledge the p!ss poor performance the team has just put in.

Its just nonsense about him having a sense of relief in the circumstances of players having to back up....well why on earth didn't he use his full squad? Kirke, Smith, Moore...People are not fond of those three on here but McDermott cannot play the fatigue card if he does not use 3 of his established squad members.

Agreed, and I will go back to what I have said for a while, I would love to see Hall tried out in the backrow. When he came in looking for work in the middle he looked a line breaker all the way, something we don't have there at the moment.

And Fatboy, Amor looked very good for first 10 or 12 mins of game, then got smashed by Kylie and looked as bad as the rest of the Leeds props. Raleigh looked by far the best prop on the pitch.

Tim Smith and Aiton though didn't half show how far behind our side as dropped tonight, by far the best players on the park.

What a terrible game - for a supposed game amongst elite sides it was terrible advert for SL. When Ali is the best player on the field by a distance you know the standards are a worry.

Team selection for Leeds was a confused to say the least and configuration during the game was a times just plain barmy. Why McDermott felt the need to play Peacock and Sinfield, both players over 30, only two days after a strenuous training run is puzzling. With Moore and Ward he would have more than adequate cover of the correct standard.

Wakey showed they are good side to watch and but for a couple plays not going their way they could have won the game and Leeds would have had no complaints.

Of the Leeds players Ward looked as good as any although some work is required on his goal line defence, something I'm sure McDermott will sort

The other half backs and I include Burrow offered nothing constructive in the game and some changes are required here for next season, especially if Hardaker is the long term view for FB. Lunt showed why he cannot get a gig at the Giants.

Hardaker looked a natural FB, he dealt with the high ball - albeit unchallanged - well and he looks a threat ball in hand. BJB had one of his best games and a run in the side is required as he seems a confidence player.

Amor looked a world away from Griffin/Kylie and his continued inability to impress the Leeds management is puzzling.

The game lacked any kind of intensity and perhaps this is what we have to get used to until some radical changes are forthcoming for Hetherington - I for one, am not holding my breath.

Agree 100%. Would rather see tight defences, happier with say 20 - 16.

Agree regarding Amor. In his 1st spell he looked the part but when he returned later in the game was poor. Same thing happened last time I saw him play at Headingley. That said he still offers more than Griffin imo. He did make good yards in that 1st spell and was difficult to handle.

Sal-re-Lunt he was used as an impact BR which is something he clearly isn't.
We have a 30 man squad and only 2 injuries yet we picked the same old tired out of form players that just sums up how our coach thinks.