It is entertainment, it's just a game at the end of the day. I love rugby and love Leeds, but I've realised that in reality has little impact on what happens in my life. So for me, if it's a bad performance, I'll talk to mates on a WhatsApp group, might put the odd message on here, but I don't feel the need to put any criticism on social media for the world and that player to see.

Ultimately, the people affected by a bad performance are the players and staff at the club. So I'm happy to leave it to them to deal with and address. Guess this discussion goes beyond rugby and is about the whole place of social media, but that's not for this time or place.

As an example, I just feel that seeing things like the criticism that's on Twitter at the moment about McClelland for not being good enough, is just unnecessary. A young player who is trying to make his way in the game, what benefit does it bring to him or the club to see people saying that about him? I remember reading in someone's sport biography that players, whilst appreciating the fans, also find them to be buffoons because they/we don't know the intricaciesof what they do. And the point stuck with me. Of course we have our opinions, but I don't think I'm qualified to criticise a player in public. I don't know him or know the impact it will have. The only person I think should be doing that is his coach who should know if it would be a motivator for him.

It would be interesting to know what impact it does actually have on players when they see things on social media. Maybe I'm off the mark.

Some good points made. Personally I think the Hall thing is a storm in a teacup; I saw one or two criticisms but they were a small minority. Most sensible fans totally understand that 18 is very young to take the field in this sport, unless you are a genetic freak like Sam Burgess or Chev Walker.

There is a saying that unhelpful criticism aims to make yourself feel better; and helpful criticism makes the world better.

The critsicm of Hall on the game thread on here were OTT and short sighted.
Think the article had a point to be honest.

I think the main difference is that booing and cheering is expected. It will lift players and adds to the pantomime of sport. It's when it goes beyond that.

Most people have probably heard fans overstepping the mark and shouting personal insults when a player is within earshot. That's too far and is more prevalent on social media. Some people who wouldn't say it out loud think it's OK in text because they have the right for freedom of speech.

I personally don't think I have the right to criticise because I pay my money. My money is paid for the right to watch and that's it. I also don't think that because they're doing a job we'd all love to, they're there to be shot down.

I completely agree, and that's why my post states that if it's personal it's not on!

This is actually just a part of a much larger conversation of the use of social media in society. Social media is not real life and is completely toxic. I personally don't use social media for that reason, and think the world would generally be better without it. The best thing for players would probably be not to use it or to have private accounts in my view, but at the end of the day it's their individual choice.

I still maintain that if I pay money to watch my team play, I get to boo them if I want (which I don't think I ever actually have). I certainly felt like booing a lot of times under McDermott, not for individual bad performances, but for the absolute boring, rubbish to watch style of rugby we generally played. It's part of being a fan!

Analysis of team or player performance is part and parcel of sport. It's people discussing down the pub after the game etc.
Doing it on Facebook or here or wherever is the same in my opinion. It's a virtual representation of those face to face discussions.
Personal abuse is unnecessary and says more about the person commenting than the subject.
Tagging someone on social media so they see the abuse is nasty.

If I were a pro RL player I wouldn't have it, or would have a private account. Because even 1% of morons is still a significant number