Oledski is our best prop by some distance (IMO). He's struggled a bit with form after injuries, but this season he's been very good for the most part, eating up metres. He doesn't make many eye-catching busts through the middle or big hits in defence, and he's not the Peacock-style pack leader we badly need - but he could well develop into that player. He's also not an aggressive enforcer type prop.

I think Oledski would be fine with the right pack around him. Lisone is only good in stints, and while he's looked okay in a few games doing longer minutes under Arthur, he's still as much as likely to be a liability with errors and discipline. Oledski can do the longer minutes and rack up the metres that none of our other forwards can match. We badly need someone like Holroyd to step up to being a longer stint prop in Oledski's mould. The other middles are nothing more than okay - Sangare, Goudemand, Donaldson, and Lisone 70% of the time etc. And that's not good enough for a club of our ambitions.

We also badly lack size and punch in the second row, as has been mentioned every week. I'm more optimistic re: Gannon for next season, although it will be tough for him after so long out. McDonnell is good provided he kicks on. Bentley's a good squad player, it's just a shame he's not a bit bigger. Martin needs to be replaced by a more destructive running type back row.

The player I'm most worried about is Cam Smith - one of our best last season, but doesn't seem to have an obvious role that he can excell at anymore?

Cam Smith is the top tackler in SL by a fair distance - he's simply doing too much work to compensate for some of our other deficiencies

Cam Smith's problems are more fundamental than that. Everything he does is lacking in dynamism. He makes a lot of tackles, but often as second/third man in and he does not stop attackers in their tracks. He is also one of of our many forwards who cannot run the ball in hard. His 'ball handling' is too slow and actively hurts the team half the time.

I just don't see that reducing the number of tackles would make much difference unless he completely changes his physique and approach in the off season to focus on less involvement but with far more impact. If I was Arthur that's what I'd look to try to do, but I think its a long shot for working. I can't remember seeing a forward lacking in oomph suddenly turning his whole style of play around at 26 years old.

We're not going to turn the first team around by pretending that player's faults are because of other players in the squad and not to their own deficiencies. Same goes for Oledzki, Newman and everyone else. If they want to be part of the turnaround they all have to look to themselves first. This off season promises to be the hardest for years for a whole bunch of our squad, and some will not make the grade even with that.

Cam Smith was player of the year last year and should have made the England squad.

He’s had a poor year but I'm not sure why some fans want to write players off so easily. This years off season is huge for some of our players that I agree with.

You say players can’t develop at 26, look at how Elliot Minchella has thrived in a decent side coached well.

Minchella had the basic physical tools to be a decent player. That's what I'm not sure about with Smith.

I'm not writing him off completely, but I'd say you would be in a small group saying Cam should have played for England, and I'm just not sure what role he's supposed to play for Leeds going forward. I'm not sure Arthur would look to play him as a ball handler (its not an NRL thing really), he's simply not dynamic enough to be a prop at his size, and so I'm a bit lost as to what to do, as Smith seems to be as well. Maybe an off-season changing focus will make the world of difference. I hope so.

Anyway, my basic point was that we can all make excuses, as every single player would look better in a better team. Its the same rather pointless debate we've had about any number of players in recent years (Liam Sutcliffe, Brad Dwyer etc etc). What we desperately need are more players who make a real difference without needing the other 16 to be great.

That we can agree on.

Personally I think Smith has earned (over a number years) a bit patience from the fans. He may never be a great player but he's hardly the root of our problems. If he can't kick on with what we all hope will be a better prop rotation next year, he’ll be looking over his shoulder at (hopefully) Gannon, who I think could be an excellent loose, or young Cassell, who by all accounts is going to be a very good player indeed. It'll sort itself out one way or another.

Its been interesting to read the debate re Oledski, as it was a fellow Wiganer who asked a genuine question about him, as to whether he would prosper better with a move away i.e had he gone stale at Leeds.

there's no doubt he has the ability to be a top level prop (note i'm not saying he isnt with this comment), but he needs more around him at Leeds to allow him to develop into that player who is recognised week in week out. At Wigan we realised that changes to tackle height and the pending change re number of games, would mean we needed to change our approach to props particularly, and despite even Wigan fans joking about us signing a prop a week, its shown the club knew what they were doing

Signing Thompson, Dupree, Eseh and chan to run alongside Cooper, Havard, Byrne, Mago, Hill and Ellis (admittedly now at 13) has meant with suspension and injury, in the main we have been able to play 4 recognised props and maintain intensity during games. Yes, we've lost games during the season, but it looks like we have been trying to manage the intensity, with peaks for WCC, CC and now a GF run

Looking from outside in to the Leeds pack, Oledski is the only one who would get into the Wigan rotation, and he'd likely be fighting for a place on the bench at this moment in time. As we've seen Eseh and Chan were signed for the future, but they need to step up in this off season to start to fight for a 1st team spot. Cooper is being let go, so thats Hill's chance to make his real claim. He hasnt let us down, and as a young lad, is now looking ready to get more game time next season

i've just watched Fridays game back on TV and the 2 young lads (Edgell & Lumb) came out of it with plenty of credit, but were let down by far more senior / experienced players, and i'm looking forward to see how they both develop

We unfortunately had two successive coaches in Agar and Smith who didn't seem to value big props so we haven't prioritised recruitment there for years. We started this season with just four actual props, with question marks over 3 of them - Holroyd (fitness/ability to play a full season), Lisone (short minutes, fitness) and Sangare (just WTF). Even if they were all seen as good enough, we'd need at least another one or two to be comfortable.

The plan then was to use other forwards as 'middles' - Donaldson, Goudemand, Bentley - to fill in as required. As we lost Holroyd (just 6 games) we've had to use these guys a lot, but even if he'd played more games, the plan was to use fill-ins.

Add to the prop issue a backrow with workers but no size/punch and its clear to see why we're getting crushed up front far too often. Its possible for a smaller pack to compete every now and then, but not every week, and not against good teams with big forwards. We've seen that for years vs Sts with Walmsley and co terrorising us and now Wigan, Wire and others when they really want the win.

I cannot see this improving significantly without at least 2 and ideally 3 big forwards. One just won't be enough (and if they get injured we're back to square one). Maybe Gannon, Ruan, TNW and Littlewood can offset one of those, but they are very green and I wouldn't want to bet the season on it.

It's a fundamental of the game that you need power and size up front. I'm sure Smith was trying to be too clever by half with his recruitment and thought he could ignore that fundamental. Think the Wigan approach is spot on. They've been successful because they're rock solid up front which means they get good field position and they have decent halfbacks and two really quick players who can capitalise. It's not rocket science.

Think Leeds need at least three props and a decent sized hard running second rower. See what the rest of the side can do with a half decent platform. Think there's also still a place for Cam Smith. He can perform a Radley/Yeo type role at loose forward so a bit of ball handling, intelligent running and good defence.

Agree with all that, I think smith’s idea was a lightweight pack,extremely mobile and attempt to run big opposition packs off the park. The first half of the home league game against saints we achieved that and dominated saints. Second half we were well beaten and ultimately lost the game. Not certain if we ran out of steam or saints wised up to the situation.

I wouldn’t believe everything that set of clowns say.

Its actually scarier if its not true that we're spending quite a bit less than others. It means that a team that is lower-end mid table costs the same as the very top. Which means we've royally messed up our cap spend with some players earning way more than they would elsewhere. That makes it harder to shift contracted players as they'd likely face a pay cut, and gives us less room to manoeuvre.

I don't expect us to sign a Brodie Croft level player for next year in terms of interest, but forwards are generally less exciting signings anyway.

]


uncle Tony tried that in 2006 and failed miserable.

The one glimmer of hope I’m hanging onto is that in Blease’s first press conference he started going on about our pack under Graham
Murray, I’m sure he gets it and will try to make changes as and when cap gets freed up.

Would love to know what the actual cap spend is and what Wigan are paying all those props and what we are paying ours. The other big advantage is Bevan French who is worth every penny. He’s so far ahead of 90% of SL players it’s ridiculous.

Oledski will benefit from playing fewer minutes but he also needs to cut out the volume and regularity of very basic errors even when not fatigued.