Yes but Toovey isn't working for McDermott - when was the last time you heard McDermott suggest another coach at Leeds has been responsible for improving a player. Toovey has coached at a much higher level than McDermott so the praise can't be seen as endangering his position. The question that should be being asked is why has Lilley had to go elsewhere get the skills gain? When was the last time McDermott employed an assistant that could feasibly take his job if things were not going according to plan - a bit like when GH employed him as an assistant to McClennan?

So you've never heard McDermott praise Plume, Eaton, Davidson, Lowes and the likes of Sinfield and Peacock for the way they took training? Ok then

Nope I haven't - I have heard him Sinfield and Peacock took training the day before games - but if you can show me a quote where a significant improvement in a players skills is down to a coach other than McDermott then so be it - and I don't mean an improvement in one game.

Off your trot and prove your point

when was the last time he was directly asked a question about them in a post-match presser?

What a crock. Is there a league tables for the most times head coaches praise individuals in their coaching teams for improving players? Coaches/ coaching teams are employed to do that amongst other duties. We get it, you don't like Macca. FFS give the "every opportunity to give him a dig" a rest. It's boring.

Would crediting Eaton for the improvement Keinhorst made at Hunslet and pointing out that it was Eaton's idea to move Keinhorst to 2nd row do or will you keep shifting?

The reason Saints seemed to not struggle for metres wasn't necessarily because our line speed wasn't great, it was because Saints passed the ball very wide of the ruck from dummy half, meaning that they were able to isolate more defenders and run at bigger holes in the defensive line on the edges. It was a great tactic, and one I'd like to see Leeds use more often.

Whilst I don't really get the "praise other coaches" nonsense, it must be increasingly difficult for the "McDermott to stay" brigade to justify their opinion.

I actually think he now DELIBERATELY doesn't use all 17 players as a sort of "FU, I am the boss & this is my way" retort to detractors. He has used this "system/tactic (?)" in increasing regularity as his tenure has progressed. The core members of the squad have suffered over the years because of this (IMO) pig-headedness. I TOTALLY understand not using the likes of Walters or an untried youngster in a top-of-the-table clash with, say, Wigan with the scores level & 15 minutes to go; but that is not the case.

His unwillingness to unleash promising youngsters is startlingly obvious compared to our peers in SL. His reluctance to bring in "specialist" attacking coaches to add spark, structure and variety to a very stale and one-dimensional line smacks of "empire-building" and negative thought processes.

I know some people do not like the opinion that he is very limited without the leadership of Sinfield & Peacock (& to be fair what coach wouldn't miss them?), but all the signs (to me anyway) point to a desperate need for fresh blood/ideas from a new coaching staff.

This does not detract from his fine management of an already-successful & settled squad over a number of years.

Sal- My pov re-Mcdermott is well known & hasn't changed but just watch any interview when we've won a semi final or Final he always mentions Davidson Eaton & Plume tbf .

Whether people like him or not, want him to stay or go, the guy like anyone else wants to win first and foremost. Anybody thinking his team selections and subs are based more on sticking two fingers up to people rather than him having out what HE THINKS is his best team to get the result is absolutely tin foil hat deluded.

I don't think there was any intention of using Ormondroyd. That would've been his 3rd game in a week. So although it may seem McDermott was flogging the forwards against Saints, but the opposite is probably true in not using Ormondroyd.

its getting increasingley hard to justify McDermott staying when we're 2nd in the league and in the cup semi final, with a squad most said was good enough to finish mid table and do nothing?




give us these startlingly obvious multiple examples please.

I doubt he gives a crap what these "detractors" think They appear to have an over-inflated opinion of their opinion!

3 Grand Finals, 2 Challenge Cups, 2 years out from a treble, 2nd in the league and in the semi-finals of the cup. Its not really that difficult at all.

I've done a few tweets about young players not being used off the bench and how they're the future of the club (few digs at McDermott too because I do believe he needs to go at the end of the season). It's interesting because Jack Walker has been quick to like them. Without going into detail about the tweets it seems that he wants to be at the club but isn't entirely happy with the coach. I worry that McDermott staying could have a negative impact on the squad next year.

As for Thursday night, I thought it was a good win with some good individual performance but a e team performance. The lack of movement from runners in attack is apaling and the amount of times we had the ball wide left only to drive to the sticks on the next play is frustrating, especially when Wilkin was off. It's good to have off the cuff play but it needs to be with some attacking structure. I know people will throw some stats about how many trophies we've won, but we look like a poorly drilled team.

There really needs to be a change in the coaching set up at the club. I'd like to see Toovey come in as head coach with a selection of Burrow, McGuire, JJB and Morley supporting as backs and forwards coaches

Toovey's a fair shout, but there wasn't too much open discussion about him before McD mentioned him on Thursday, which says something. And whilst it's great having former players stay after they've retired, there are enough examples in all sports of good players becoming cr*p coaches, so I wouldn't want to see us putting all our eggs in that basket.

That's fair enough and it is about the balance. Look at Cas and how having 3 former half backs has improved their play. With the right head coach directing things, some former players could have a positive impact. Rob has certainly been getting good plaudits and Morley has started out pretty well with the youngsters.

your spot on. other clubs have offered him specialist coaching. leeds dont don't even have a skills coach. he's worried his game won't improve under the current set up. not specifically McDermott more lack of specialist coaches

Kurt Gidley is retiring at the end of the season, he might be interested in a coaching role.

He can come in and tell the players how to fail to turn up in big games.

Or how to go to the line, dummy....and then go yourself. Did it on the last play of last years GF when Warrington had numbers

So I started looking out for it and it's something he does a lot.

Constantly hear this every time with not only youngsters but senior players and how poor Leeds are at appealing to them cone contract time. Yet we consistently keep hold of players both senior and youth and they're happy to sign long contracts.

We can't be as bad as the ITK crowd like to make out.

I'm amazed these better-run clubs have any need to chase our youngsters at all.

not a case of ITK as you put it. someone told me. I asked an ex leeds player I know who spoke to a current player who confirmed it. simple as that.
he wants to stay just worried he won't progress as he should. it's well known leeds don't have specialist coaches like other teams. perhaps they should

The non-use of subs is just indefensible. If Ormondroyd was tired and there was never an intent to use him, then its an appalling waste of a sub spot. The game as played at the top level involves rotating forwards off the bench. Not doing that is stupid. Mind you, so is not employing specialist coaches if you have the means to do so.