I don't see what difference that would have made, and can't see how this could have effected our early season form.

Am I the only one that now feels the players attitude and McLennan should be questioned?

Surely if prize money like that was to be had then every player should have been busting a gut to have the opportunity to play in the that game? Hence why I don't see a problem in offering it at start of season.

Where the problem is, is why the feck have the players not be performing to a level that gives them a spot? And why as the coach not been giving other players an opportunity to "bust a gut" to get that opportunity? Despite the squad strength, is this team picking its self?

Im not a strong believer for dropping players. For Salford/Wakey Bluey could have dropped Burrow and McGuire. They would have hurt and suffered but also the team would have been worse off without them. The whole team is lacking confidence. The only way Burrow and Mags are going to fire again is by consistently getting minutes on the pitch and listening to Blueys advise on what to do next time out.

90% of the Rhinos side are too professional and experienced to be left out of squad because of form. Maybe the younger boys but not the seniors.

I don't buy into this supposed lack of confidence. The team KNOW they are good enough to have won 3 GFs on the bounce FFS. More likely that coaches and players are busy putting the defensive structures in place and that these haven't been perfected yet. Once we resume creating pressure through our defence the results will come, hopefully with a bit more attacking flair.

The question I was asking was, if an opportunity is available to earn such extra money, surely every player would want to be a part of that team? and if that is the case we should have seen players putting in far better performances so far than what we have seen. Otherwise it begs the question, as to whether certain players are guaranteed spots regardless?

Judging by your last sentence there, you obviously feel a players form should have no basis on getting picked, and that history is the deciding factor.

Would you like to give some idea of who these players are that are not getting an opportunity in the first team and why they would be better options than the incumbents?

You don't drop players unless you have better options to replace them with. Having lost Delaney, Ablett and now Donald the 17 does, IMO, pretty much pick itself.

I'd be slightly worried about indicators to Eastwood's motivation for being here at all if the main thing he wants to talk to the Aussie press about is how much money he stands to make.

I know what your saying mate but If its a lack of effort then you would have to questions their attitude. But i dont think its got anything to do with effort.

As for team selecton when you have such professionalism oozing thoughtout the side then most of the time leaving a player out of the squad will do more harm than good as it would tend to be a form factor and not attitude.

You can have as many threads as you like about the merits of who should start between Diskin and Buderus, but neither player as yet put in a decent performance between them. What then gives McShane an opportunity?

Burgess is a GF winning player but somehow has only achieved to play in one game yet this year, despite two man of the match awards in preseason.

Kirke has been shocking. What does Pitts have to do to be given an opportunity to play in front of him? how bad does Kirke need to be?

I accept our biggest problems have been at halfback, but also accept that unfortunately we don't have another option to pressure a change there. Something many of us have banged on about for the last 18 months.

Judging by your last sentence then you obviously don't go along with the thoughts of the majority of supporters and the club management that this is the strongest squad we have ever had?

I am not trying to crtiisize the players or call for mass changes. But question the attitude when prize money like that is available.

So Andy you go to work for the glory? - I don't I attend the office for the money - expecting rugby players to be any different is puzzling - to them Leeds is a place of work not a place of worship!!

So if your work said right we are going to give you an incentive - are you saying it would make little or no difference to your work ethic?

I don't David, but if somebody offered me the opportunity to go work on the other side of the world I think I would find more important things to talk about than how much I stand to earn from it.

Neither is my career restricted to a period of 12-15 years in which I want to achieve (not necessarily earn) as much as I possibly can.

It would count on the cap, so we can safely assume Leeds are at least that amount under the cap.

UNLESS, they have had to lose those opening games to remain within the cap. Now that would be interesting.

In reality, in the days of the cap, all win bonuses should be defined before the start of the season.

I am saying my output would improve. Hard to improve on perfection like but would certainly look to earn that incentive.

Which is what I was saying earlier. I would have expected the same from the players to get the chance to have the opportunity of that prize, but we are far from seeing it. Unless as I question, and as Andy Gilder feels, they are guaranteed their spots.

We don't see what goes on in training nor are we party to what the real goals are for the season.

To say Burgess having a decent game in a practice match is justification for selecting him after an abysmal display in the real world is a strange notion.

As for Pitts you talk to Wakey fans and he didn't exactly shine out in the real world - Leeds got the wrong one, they should have got Ferguson.

surprised eastwood has said this to the press , even if its true about mclennan!

Right, so you are in agreement with Andy, that we do NOT have a strong squad then?

Otherwise what is the point if they are deemed not good enough for selection even though players in their positions are in poor form?

By the way I wasn't saying Burgess deserves selection based on a practice match. I was questioning that he had the spot from last years GF, and continued the form in preseason by getting two MOM awards, yet putting two backrowers at prop instead of him was the option for the 1st game.

Talk to most Wakey fans and they will tell you that Pitts as the potential to be really big, and probably needed the move to a club like Leeds to achieve it. That said, it is irrelevant, the point is how bad does Kirke need to play to losse his position one week to this other option?

Again though, it wasn't about mass changes and critisizing. It was about the fact that I FEEL that players should have been busting a gut to earn the right to play in that WCC to earn that prize money. Yet we have not seen that from most of the players, and yet no changes have been intimated by the coach, despite those poor performances.