...anybody still think it was a good idea to loan these two out this season ??

Leeds could have had a much more effective starting threequarter line up of:


Hardaker/Jones-Bishop/Watkins/Hall


.....and can anybody tell me please what Cross has to offer over Ambler ?

At the very least, with Ambler in the squad, we would not have to endure any more Kirke being our only present apology-of-a-prop option from the bench.

I heard there was this thing called the salary cap? Anybody know any more about it?

Was I missing something that Ambler did over the weekend to result in his sudden elevation to first name on the teamsheet?

No. He was average. He was fine. He's not Leeds first team yet, and hopefully will be next year.

Well, not really, less than 100 NRL games, so about 3 years?

I hardly stated Ambler should be "first name on the teamsheet"....merely that he is undoubtedly a better option than Kirke and no worse than Cross (admittedly there is still time for him to come good, but was his signing the best use of the salary cap at the expense of the exiled Ambler ?).

As for BJB....there were some at the end of last season who poured scorn on the very idea that BJB should start this season as a first choice threequarter above the likes of Delaney and Smith.

Ho hum !

Unlike Jones-Bishop (or Watkins or Broughton) would have been last season except 1) Leeds opted to needlessly extend the contract of an average antipodean for one more year, 2) Leeds probably couldn't recall him as they'd forgotten to insert a recall clause? 3) Coach McClennan insisted he was primarily a full-back anyway, 4) We had Tom Bush..... super.

Ambler or Kirke at prop? Not the most taxing question to be honest.

Thankyou !

Why this reluctance to give the young talent their chance to cement a place in favour of aged/crap antipodeans or 'legends' living on past glories from [iany[/i part of the world ? We lost Broughton...let's not risk losing BJB or Watkins by having them play second fiddle to Delaney and Senior.

Incidentally I always championed Buderus over Diskin for no other reason than he was by far the better man for the position (IMO)....however if this Liam Hood is all that some think he is, then for gawd's sake get him in the side sooner rather than later. Buderus will then have to make do with a supporting role: like it or lump it.

Haven't seen Hood play so can't comment on him but I think Buderus still has much to offer and was very good yesterday.

If Hood can defend he probably should already be in front of McShane.

I agree on all counts. I am not denigrating Buderus at all: he is class and he did play well.

My point is the club has had a recent history of not (IMO) promoting young talent soon enough....instead preferring to hang on to the elder statesman/antipodean and exile the young uns to "gain experience".

(At what age did John Holmes make his debut again ?)

If the player is good enough then he is old enough (IMO)...and there should never be room for sentiment.

Sinfield was 16 at début too IIRC!

If they're good enough, they're old enough.