Quote: Leeds_Luke "Whilst I would normally agree, we are talking about a team with the worse attack in the league by a long shot and one who haven't found the tryline for three weeks now. And they looked more dangerous than us for a long period of the game. If that was any other team we would have gone into half time a couple of scores down and nothing to show for it.
Admittedly, we defended the line well. We held up players a couple of times and prevented what should have been a couple of tries without losing composure.
We did look weak in attack though. Up until Trinity fell apart and we started to put some good plays together. I know it was far from ideal conditions to play flowing rugby, and the players were suffering from the sub-zero temperature. And that goes for both teams.
I just can't help feeling somewhat uninspired by the Leeds performance. I know we would have likely lost the game to any team that actually knows how to score.
The performance did remind me a little of the circa 2011 (?) team how for most of the season would look terrible for the first half, but then pull a win out of the bag with a flurry of scores in the last 20 purely on fitness. Maybe it just looked similar under the circumstances with Trinity, but I hope we are returning to be the fittest team in the League again.'"
It was a poor first half, but teams get fatigued for a reason. Think the game plan revolves around moving the ball wider and earlier than the most teams and although mistakes are inevitably made it does tire the opposing middles. When we are bit more direct in the second half we start to find the gaps. One things for sure, that is a game we might well of lost in the Agar era.