It's not the 'official' away kit, it's the special shirt for Magic weekend that we've worn once before against Warrington away. It's been a really lucky shirt so far

You need to start reading posts properly Sal, because your showing poor form.

In the first half Huddersfield were the poorest side we have played this year.

no chance. they were poor in attack all game yes, but worst team we have played? no way. hull 2nd half.

So how was McGuire?

Any more mouthing off to the ref?

I've not watched it back but from first viewing I thought the Huddersfield player knocked it out. I know Steve said he didn't but Stevo's speaks complete reactionary BS half the time

missing briars gob are we?

At least McGuire managed to avoid showering the officials with expletives. A step up from Brough, who was a very, very lucky boy to stay on the field after the spray he gave the touch judge late on in the game. Fortunate he picked on one of the younger ones who lacked the bottle to bring it to Silverwood's attention.

On the obstruction thing, last season the Huby one would have been given all day long. Everyone knew what the laws and interpretation were, you stop in the line you're going to get penalised. For some unknown reason the RFL decided that wasn't good enough, and went back to allowing referees to make their own mind up based on a set of subjective criteria whether an obstruction had occurred. As a result, we're back in chaos. Teams are being penalised where no defender is impeded - the Leeds one in the first half - while defenders are then clearly being impeded and no penalty given because the VR doesn't think they've made "enough" of an effort to get around the 17 stone roadblock in their way.

It's little wonder players and spectators get frustrated at the inconsistency shown both game to game and even during games.

In the end perhaps a fair result and given our injuries one I would have accepted before the match. Although it is disappointing to see an 22-8 lead whittled down it just shows how momentum is the key in the modern game.

IMO to suggest Huddersfield were poor in the first half disrespects both them and Leeds. They started well we played some good rugby and were well on top at half time. The second half swing in momentum came in part as a result of a string of penalties against Leeds combined with a much improved Brough which enthused the whole Huddersfield side. During this period I thought our defense was outstanding led by JP and Cuthbo although the latter made rather a meal of the obstruction he perhaps expected that Hardaker would not have been so easily swotted out of the way for the try.

I have been one of Sinfield's biggest fans throughout his career but all good things come to an end eventually as I have witnessed with the many other great players in almost 60 years of watching our great game. Given the small amount of possession we had in the second half even Sinfield at his very best would have struggle to turn the tide. Those that are suggesting he should have been in the side are ignoring the fact that his form for almost a year has been way down and that includes his leadership performances. This does not mean that Sinfield will not still play a useful part as the season rolls on. I am sure he will.

Keinhorst did ok and for this game Mac was right to continue with Watkins on the wing due to the danger of Brough's kicking game. JJB did remarkably well to return after injury with so much energy and Delaney was again in form until he had to go off. It is easy to be critical of creative players when things don't come off and McGuire's missed touch finder was one such occasion but it was very much the sort of thing Sinfield would have tried to gain better field position at a time when we needed to be out of our own half.

Mac has shown he will gradually introduce the youngsters and not overplay them but when ready he will back them which includes allowing them to make the mistakes they will learn from. It is somewhat ironic that some of those that were critical of Mac for not playing the youngsters more often are now at him for allowing the transition to progress.

On the positive side I thought the coach and players did well in the short turn around to improve on the performance of the Warrington game and now we get a longer time to recover energy and prepare for the Widnes game.

Whilst the Cuthbertson decision could go another way on another day we were fortunate when Ablett knocked on and we scored on the next play.
For me Delaney had his best game before coming off, Keinhorst did not let anyone down but for me should be on the wing with Watkins at centre.
Sutcliffe and McGuire look impressive until Burrow comes on for some reason.
If the coach did drop Sinfield last night then maybe he needs to do the same with Burrow next week who was absolute gash last night and has been all season.
Maybe the move to Cas is playing on his mind
Sinfield as replacement hooker next week maybe or Robbie Ward.
Not sure having Sinfield on the park would have prevented the penalties either or won us the game.
Sutclife threw some impressives passes that maybe Sinfield would not have done.
All in all a fair result but we really need to be killing off teams when so far in front.

Re the Cuthbertson non-obstruction, isn't the distance between ball carrier and would-be tackler taken account of under the new ruling? For me Cuthbertson showed so little intent in getting to the carrier, preferring instead to flap about, that there's no way any official could conclude he would have got there. Had he made a serious attempt they might have. Try for me, I'm afraid.

Had a good look at replays of the last play where Burrow fell over, and everyone was onside from Peacock's kick. Would need another angle at Watkins possibly knocking it on (think he batted it backwards though). Am pretty sure try would have stood.

He was excellent week before as well.

Some people really need to start looking at both sides rather than trying to make out something is better for their own.

Anderson is spot on

I'd agree with that, I think he's just getting back up to speed since his injury

i dont have a problem with reading you definitely have a problem with anyone challenging you views.

nowhere near as bad as Hull in the second half or wakey in either half
At least they made ground they just couldnt finish when close to the line

On Sinfield I appreciate your point it was surprised he wasnt playing but if you want Sutcliffe to develop and play Sinfield you have an issue. Twenty years of having your own ball isnt going to be an easy habit to forget. That is before we discuss his defence if he is going to play in the forwards