This having players that are deemed "untouchable" despite poor performances needs knocking on the head asap imo.
I said it last year as did others and i stand by the opinion that Kylie is done he's a passenger and should already be gone.
Thus far this year Sinfield goal kicks aside has had a decent 20 minutes v Widnes & an offload v Wire as positives the rest just isn't good enough to warrant automatic selection now.
Now don't get me wrong i know its only 5 games in but how long do you give players that aren't performing?
Whether the CEO & Coach accept it or not the ageing stars are on a downward spiral irrespective of what an idiot has done off the field.
There are players waiting on the fringes and options to try going forward if it doesn't work then the GH better blow the cob webs off the Cheque book.

spot on in every respect. you have to add the forward planning has been shocking

Good post rhinoms

One small aside, but in 30 years I've never seen any team play for 80 minutes without committing more than one offence worthy of a penalty. Assuming the 7-1 count is correct of course.

from memory I don't think the 7-1 was correct. I'm sure they were pinged for a high shot and an offside. I can only think that the 7-1 covered a period of the game.

Edit, - just checked SL website [urlhttp://www.superleague.co.uk/report/11053[/url and the penalty count was 7-5

referees usually even it out near the end by giving the losing side a few near the end

it was 6-1 until 15 minutes to go think? lol

Penalties were awarded in the following sequence to

W,L,W,W
H/T
W,W,L,W,L,L,W,L

IIRC in terms of low counts either Leeds or Salford once went 80 mins in a JP/Regal semi-final at Valley Parade without conceding any penalties.

Also a Hull FC - Leeds game at the KC where neither side conceded a penalty in the opening 40 minutes.

Remember that one also now and without needing to look it up it was Steve Ganson - letting everything go including the occasional head shot.