This foolish thread is giving me a headache. I may have to kill all of you fools to you put you out of my misery (ironically of course).

I think the work has been done for me while I've been away.

I see you've tried backtracking though.

Did you watch the Leeds defence after the 1st drive from the penmalty tap? Which way did they all go?

If Watkins (and Hall) hadn't crashed would there not have been a spare man anyway?

Were you close enough to the field to hear who may have called the crash defence, Hall or Watkins or perhaps even Burrow who may have been worried he couldn't stop his runner so close to the line one on one?

I wouldn't lay that one solely on Watkins if at all. Good heads up play by Briers and poor defensive structure by the whole team.

The defence was sliding man on man, there was no problem if everyone stayed with their man and made their tackle.

Watkins left the line that was sliding right to left (and went against the drift) committing to a dummy runner that Burrow had identified as his anyway.

It was a poor read and one that had already occurred against Celtic and against Manly.

Reminded me not only of Chev Walker but also Paul Sykes in the World Cup.

Watkins never has or will be as bad him at defending in the centre!!

As someone so proficient in numbers you need a re-count.

If Ali picks up Briers, Burrow picks up #22 how do Watkins and Hall account for Riley, Gleeson and Hicks on a "man on man" basis?

If you're right there's an extra man that should've been picked up by an inside sliding defender or maybe Lee Smith should have gotten across much, much quicker. Watch the video again, even Burrow (who had been tackling #22) arrives on the scene before Smith.

Was Riley in the line or backing up behind?

The sliding defence and the touchline should have coped there and perhaps would have had Watkins not broke ranks. That action made a preventable try inevitable.

There were others but fortunately Warrington failed to execute with the line at their mercy.

You tell me if he was in the line. You've reached a decision about the culpable single party. You've also concluded how the defence would've theoretically coped with Riley.

Surely you wouldn't jump to such conclusions without viewing the evidence?

I don't need to view it, that's your job today just as mine is dredging up stats for you.

Either way the touchline was Leeds' extra defender. Hold your position in the line, take your man and make them go around you to score, if they don't run out of space. How close was Hicks to stepping in touch? Six inches was it?

And I have had such fun alayzing this with you I've broken my mantra of only posting on my employer's time. Anyway, Riley was definitely in the line.

Hicks would've had acres of space had Watkins taken Riley and Hall taken Gleeson. The touchline wasn't the issue, it was the space inside him. The covering Smith (who would've had to pick up Hicks) was miles away.

You two need one of those monitors with the pens that draw little electronic circles on the screen. Paul Cullen would be able to explain it all for you..

Nothing more to add really. We've both stated our views and been civil about it.

Except perhaps to remember that back on page 10 earlier today where you saiddefensive awareness and coping with the physical nature. That will come by playing in the 1st team.'"

ok, so if that try was watkins fault fair enough. He's cost us a try. But we are a good enough team to absorb some of these lapses. If they become regular then we would need to re-assess the situation.

Personally I feel that Watkins will have learnt more from Sundays match than he would have done in the senior acadamy.

Don't you dare make any concessions.

I've taken up DHM's suggesting and the telestrator and magic pen is on its' way from Isleworth.

Forget Cullen, I can talk boaloox with the best of them. I'll be hosting a live video link from the All You Can Eat Chinese Buffet at 12.30 tomorrow.

Tune in.

Was he available?