playing for long periods and non use of subs yes. and given the ages of some who were made to play 60/70 minute spells again yes.

Really - they play once a week and they are conditioned/or not to do that - surely a player who 30-32 should be capable of 80 minutes especially with the current intensity of SL

depends on the games and weather.under long periods of pressure and red hot weather people need rests. or do you consider them robots??

The game has so many stops and starts now I wonder how much of the 80 minutes is actually in play - every try/attempt on goal eats up a minute of the games as does virtually every scrum. There are plenty of opportunity for rest during the game and compared to some in SL e.g. Roby their physical input is minimal

Simon bell still head of youth?

right. so they are robots who can run, tackle and play for long periods in whatever weather and never get tired. yeah ok

I don't think the players were flogged as much as people seem to think, but the the body is put a huge amount of stress during a top level RL game, which takes at least 3 or 4 days to recover from. An RL player probably gets 2 days at the most, so putting the body under that amount of stress every week for 8 months without sufficient recovery time is what results in injuries. Not many injuries in RL occur as a result of a single incident, they're the result of putting the muscles, joints and bones under constant stress without a required recovery time.

That's not what I said and you know that - they are elite athletes who should be able to play 80 minutes 30 times a year - how often do you see Cameron Smith not playing 80 minutes for Melbourne, Queensland or Australia?

Cam Smith isn't your typical RL player though. If it were that simple you'd see it more often

you're sounding a bit stupid here Sal. Barely any forwards play 80 minutes at any level of the game. The physical demands of the game are too high. Its also impossible to play that many games without having niggles and picking up injury. If you don't think that's true, look at how much tape everyone has on.

McDermott had a philosophy of getting as much out of his trusted players, rather than give game time to fringe members. He was pretty much alone in his approach. Most other coaches spell props on a 20 minute basis, to refresh people in a battering role. Maybe his different approach is why we won so many grand finals.

Either way, a few seasons of bad injuries across the squad suggest that the players bodies have had enough.

I see with props - that is a specific role but back row forwards, hooker and backs should be capable of 80 minutes - Leeds last season looked capable of 30 and that is the issue.

There are plenty of forwards in the NRL that play 80 minutes - Cam Smith is one example

You do realise that hookers make more tackles than any other position and cover more meters (inc without the ball getting to the ruck)

Its comparing apples with oranges. Most hookers carry very rarely, and do so when it's easy meters. Forwards do hard carries into traffic. That's why they get spelled. Second rows should be spelled but less so.
Backs should be ok without a break as they get in game breaks.

We were hopelessly unfit last year. If you want to see a fit Leeds side, watch the 2011 GF - we defended multiple repeat sets on our line in that game and barley looked winded. The contrast in fitness and in some cases body shape between that side and this years is enormous. The changes Sinfield has made suggest he doesn't buy burn out or flogging at all.

If Furner comes in and makes players work hard in the off-season we may see some of those supposedly 'flogged' older players struggle just to get to the required standard. My own feeling is that standards dropped across the board in the last couple of years, and that rather than lead the way for higher standards some of our older players have been blagging it a bit.

Richard Agar comes in as Head of Player and Coaching Developement.