Perhaps it may be better in that case, to take your having a pop at the Rhinos fans to social media rather than here, where the vast majority of the posters are critisizing Leeds players and coach for the loss.

I don't doubt Huddersfield had a fair few missing, so too did Leeds, and it is embarrassing when posters ignore this from other teams but always look for excuses for Leeds. However, whatever the names on the shirt there was no better team out there of the two, and both should be embarrassed in their performance. They were two very poor teams, in a current league that is full of poor quality teams.

There was a better team....the team that won. They scored more points and defended better.

No there wasn't which is what I said. A team won, that is different. Many games over the years where the better team lost. On this occasion neither was better, they were both equally poor.

Find a way to score more points, significantly more, the there's the best team.

I don't do social media. I did but never realised there were so many retards in this world

No it isn't it is the winning team. The view you state is the sort of one who looks at a paper and reads results rather than forms the opinion from the match. Teams do lose by scoring more tries too, purely by missed kicks, does that make them better or worse? Nobody can claim credit of been the better team on Thursday night. They can claim they got the victory and two points, nothing else.

I watched the game intently. My conclusion comes from the fact that whilst two poor teams competed, one of those teams defended better, kicked better and scored significantly more points.....thus.....the better team won.

The better team did win. That they were of poor quality says a lot about the Leeds performance, but it is true to say the better team won.

They did kick better, that's about the only thing you have right. They both had the same carries, but Leeds made more metres. Leeds made more breaks. Leeds made more offloads. Despite you saying they defended better they actually missed tackles 20% more than Leeds. In nine out of ten games, with stats like that the losing team would normally be the winner. Does that mean Leeds were the better team? No, because they never took advantage of which those stats should give them. Huddersfield on the other hand were lucky they were playing a team that poor. There wasn't a better team out of it. There was a team that won, and that is it.

Do you stamp your feet whilst posting?

Stats stats stats and stats.......well done. Kicked better, defended better (i.e. prevented us getting over the try line) and took their chances. But please, keep straw clutching, it's entertaining in a slightly sad way.

no its just sad

The game changed when hall sent out the pass that was dropped, Huddersfield passed out wide and scored. The defence on that play was poor. You could have thrown a blanket over several Leeds players, grouped in the middle of the pitch. So the defence line was not formed. Not certain as to briscoes position, probably out of position as per most of this season
I know it's blindingly obvious but we desperately need a quality half back to improve our kicking game and move us around the field.

Like Gotcha has said, I wouldn't really call it "the better team won".....more a case the worst team lost. A poor performance beat an awful performance. My comments on the VT about the ref were just a wind up that Hudds fans (and yourself) jumped on. We hear year upon year about how we get all the calls from refs and Red Hall, why not give them some back.

Like we can see with your new betting offer with Lioner81, you suddenly grow a pair when Leeds start losing, quite sad.