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

I'm not for a second saying everything would have been different if Sinfield was on......but I don't think he would have gone for touch from the 20m restart whilst we were under so much pressure and had had such little ball in hand which imo was a massive turning point in the game,

Spot on. And he's got there by being played achieving match fitness after an injured pre-season and he's now getting into his groove.

A few weeks ago there were many calls for him to be dropped. Astounding really when he has proven what he can contribute when able.

May have got this wrong, but I read that as McGuire trying to do something Sinfield-esque away from his usual game. He did on other side of coin put some clever kicks in as well.

Think Leeds have fired a few warning shots for all oppoisition to take note of.

When game was locked at 20 all, few minutes left. how many teams would have puffed their cheeks and thought 'we'll settle for a point now'? Probably most. Not this Leeds team. They slung the ball, passed and offloaded in risky places in an attempt to win the game. which nearly came off.

Push Leeds into a corner in tight games and they will roll the dice.

that optional kick was an unnecessary gamble on every level

But I don't think Sinfield would do something like that during that situation considering how the second half was panning out.

Like I said I'm not suggesting that we would have won had Sinfield been on it was just my opinion on that particular play.

Match Report: Huddersfield 24 Leeds 24 www.nothingbutleague.com/super-l ... -rhinos-2/

Match Report: Huddersfield 24 Leeds 24 www.nothingbutleague.com/super-l ... -rhinos-2/