Agreed

Again agree with this. Really looking forward to seeing how some of the youngsters do. Will be a close game I imagine

Errm... wtf are you on about? Fit players are best on the pitch, at the coach's discretion. If they're injured then it might as well be seen as a well-earned break because, of course, [ithey can't be on the pitch[/i.

More generally, your criticism of the coach only works in this context if the injuries were wear and tear related. Unfortunately for you, every single one of the ten or so injuries are impact related and therefore not attributable to the coaching.

Is Sir Kev capable of peaking twice for two competitions in such a short period of time?

He managed to be world class for the first three months of the season.

Like I said, you are a total hypocrite.

I don't even think you know what you are saying yourself.

I'm saying injured players might as well rest. Fit players might as well play.

Where's the hypocrisy?

No you didn't. You said it was a good mid season rest.

Either you take enjoyment in players getting injured, or you accept a player resting will have benefits at a later date.

Something of course you have hypocritically criticised posters for, for suggesting previously.

No, there's a third - sane - option.

Unfortunately Sinfield is injured. This means he can't do the ideal thing i.e. play for the team. In these circumstances, where he cannot play, it is advantageous for him to rest. You can file it under "looking on the bright side".

You have suggested in the past that [ifit[/i players should rest to make way for younger players. I have disagreed with this hypothesis. It is my belief that the advantages of being a battle-hardened unit of players outweigh those of fit players being rested.

Please let me know if this needs any further clarification before posting any more personal insults.

According to the rhinos twitter account the 6 week layoff is speculation:

"@leedsrhinos: As stated yesterday, Sinfield will have further scans tomorrow and see a surgeon, until then anything else is pure speculation"

"@leedsrhinos: An injury layoff following surgery is a likely outcome but not the only one, as soon as we have a 100% decision we'll announce details"

You have no more idea than Gotcha if that is true or false - playing players injured could indeed lead to further more serious injuries

I'd contend that most break or twist injuries are impact related.

Players who are not fully fit are not able to react the same way and protect themselves as well as they would if they were fully fit. This causes injuries that might otherwise be avoided

Yes please explain, and dig your hole further.

Your pathetic attempt to excuse your hypocritical post is just stating the bleeding obvious in reality. You obviously feel it is good that a player is injured, as the rest is then good. If a player can not play injured then he has to rest and this is good to you.

But resting a player when the team is strong, and ensuring that player is always at his peak, is wrong in your world.

The same could apply to a player who'd had a few weeks rest and wasn't up to match speed upon his return...

Ultimately it's a question of who is in the best position to determine a player's fitness: the fans, or the coach and the conditioners. The fans might have a marginal claim to that role if our team never won anything. In the circumstances where the team is very successful, the fan who knows better is, at best, deluded.