Sinfield is still mostly defending in the same position as the last 2 years but from what I've seen this year he is on occasions just getting himself a bit more involved now and again one or two positions in. I doubt he would've done as many tackles on Friday had Buderus or Lunt been playing.

Maybe when we see the first choice line-up on right with Watkins and BJB we'll see if he keeps up his numbers or if it's a case of the defensive structure being slightly different on that right side this year with Sinfield stepping up more. Because for all the talk about Vickery, lets not forget that the right side looked pretty dodgy at times last year too with the first choice in.

I haven't got that much room on my Sky box. Did we really put out a right edge of winger, S/O, centre, 2nd row...leaving our chief playmaker defending in the middle of the pitch?

All by the by really, as Burrow, McGuire and Sinfield attacking from 9, 7 and 6 wouldn't see then align in defence any differently to if they attacked from 7, 6 and 13.

My impression was also that Sinfield in the past defended further in than he has recently. I'm sure he was far more central and involved in closing up the middle of the field - particularly in the days when scooting from dummy half was the popular tactic of many teams to make easy yards.

Without a doubt Sinfield used to defend much more centrally.

Maybe the 38 tackles had and his carries had something to do with it?

FWIW, nobody around me was laughing at the award. A few of us said, "nah it was Delaney" but JJB had an damn fine game.

Does anybody in the North Stand have the capacity to laugh? thought it was full of zero personalities?

It's a more stylish,dapper individual that patronizes the North Stand upper, none of that "Henleys" or "Bench" tat on show. There's no "Two-pintmeisters" amongst us either, we like to retain a modicum of sobriety in order to enjoy and fully understand what is happening on the field of play. We don't look down on others, we just feel glad to be part of the select number in the the North Stand

The interesting part is that the centre in the above alignment was Ablett and Sinfield still took up his defensive duties on his inside and in the GF. Nothing unusual in that as that was where he defended when starting at loose, at least as I recall. He only became an edge defender (whether two or three men in) with the requested and granted full-time switch into the starting stand-off position.



That's correct now under this coach but having lessoned Sinfield's defensive duties he's also lost the the ruck defense of a traditional hooker while adding a third edge-defending half-back - creating a higher workload for the remaining central defenders to fill.

Is it any wonder when they become fatigued, fail to read and react to situations (Delaney for the Farrell try) and/or lose discipline/concede penalties (Jones-Buchanan around the 30 minute mark) and does it make the under-use of replacements sat warming the bench (Ward 57 min and Achurch 66 min) all the more puzzling to understand?

Three edge defenders isn't unusual, or not in cases of teams that play pivots at loose forward.
This usually meant that right side second rows had to do a bit more defending as teams would have their left 2nd row in the edge four (with wing, centre and a half) whilst right 2nd rows in the middle four, with wing ,half, centre and loose on the right edge. Lots of teams no longer play a pivot at loose of course, and so play their loose forward in the middle four with the right second row on the right edge.

But still as yet no other teams defending their hooker on the edge bar McDermott's Leeds - although that only applies when he uses Burrow at hooker - not when he used Buderus, or Lunt or when he uses McShane or Hood.

It will be interesting to see what Nathan Brown does now at St Helens if he uses Lance Hohaia at dummy-half as he appeared to do V Wakefield after the injury to Roby.

Have you got links to any articles detailing this oft-cited request?

As it wasn't related (in my mind at least) to any specific match it could be contained in an article (most likely YEP) almost anywhere from across say a 2010/2011 timeframe - and I'm only guessing at that. I don't have the time needed to track it down - even if I wanted to.

Perhaps there are others who recollect Sinfield expressing the sentiment previously mentioned.

I recall we had a lengthy discussion about you making claims that Sinfield had made similar demands of Noble for the GB team. IMO your "evidence" and recollection was off on that occasion. You have form.