Would agree with most of that but I thought Burrow was one of our better players. The problem was a lack of creativity at halfback, centre and fullback where Hardaker once more died with the ball far too often.

Given that the fully fit Cowboys prepared on a sunny Queensland beach while our lads were running around in wellies after the tide came in at Kirkstall we started with a bit of a handicap. Then followed yet more injuries resulting in a much depleted squad so it was no surprise to start as huge underdogs. We gave a good account of ourselves in the first half and shaded it on points IMO despite never being smart enough on attack.

The early errors at the start of the second half from our two wingers gave them the momentum of which they took full advantage. The score line was disappointing and not a true reflection of the overall match IMO

The lack of creativity is a major problem atm. I don't remember us breaking them down last night at all . Scoring tries against the cowboys was always going to be difficult but we struggled to score in the 2 previous games too. Having Mcguire out hasn't helped but he is going to be missing for a few weeks yet.

point is that Coote had run just in case it rickashayed back in his direction whilst none of the defenders on the open side bothered to push across, little 1 per cost you against top teams, I think the end of the game showed that NQC were just fitter than Leeds

I think people see tries from kicks as lucky, but when you look at a well executed kick with a committed chase you can see its more than that. On the training paddock Handley doesn't drop that. Put 5 Aussies charging toward him and is a different picture

Handley totally misjudged it and he does have a history of similar errors so his handling is a worry. To be fair he later took some bombs well but by then the damage was done.

Is that all they are?
Just fitter than Leeds?

Sadly too many people in the amateur game think it should be just like the pro game. With the same structure, rules and attitudes. When they should be very different.
As a small example I don't give a toss about Garbutt's punch. It's 2 props having a go, great stuff. But there's no place for that, none whatsoever, in the amateur game.

In the same way as we should alter the rules to get what we want from it and we should definitely alter the structure of the amateur game. There's no reason it should mirror the pro game with a straight league and cup structure.

Then there's the attitude of far too many people involved in amateur RL. It's terrible. It's time we started regularly chucking people and clubs if need be out of the game. I know Queens are the obvious example but it's ridiculous that they're still going. They should've been disbanded long ago.
It's time league officials started taking responsibility for the state of their leagues and started handing out these bans, but sadly they won't because they're all friends with each other. So the entire system needs scrapping and starting again.

There is obviously the issue of players skills but the other side of it is that the amateur game also holds the game back in terms of increasing the number of fans of our sport. The amateur game is a huge potential entry point for new fans and it currently turns many of them away.

Nah. I think it's rare these days to find one pro team that's fitter than another which is why that "reason" for a team losing always annoys me. It's what the winning team has done with and without the ball that tires the other team not a lack of fitness.

I would say that in general I think the NRL players are more athletic. I know that's a vague term but they appear more able to be big, fast and relatively agile whereas SL players are often one or the other. There are obviously exceptions.

i think there's a mental difference. I think they're, in general, stronger mentally and don't let their heads go down as easily. I also think they're that little bit more focussed on their role. Probably only a bit but that's all it takes for players to push that little bit harder and be in support or get back to the right position in defence. Which probably comes from slightly better coaching and a more consistently intense league.

As has been mentioned lots of times, I also think we fight an uphill battle trying to teach players skills that they should've learnt at an earlier age, so their development is put back. I won't go any further into that as its already been said but I think it's obvious they're more confident passing and handling the ball.

The squad sizes/quality shouldn't go unmentioned either though. If we have our full teams out I think we do ok against them but we can't afford losing key players such as Roby, McIlorum or McGuire, especially on top of other players missing.

No, the point is that Coote run through because a kicker of Thurstons quality gets that kick through, a kicker of Burrow's quality, or any of the names you mentioned before dont do as often.

And i dont think it is fitness, it was that NQC asked questions nearly every tackle constantly rolling forward and moving them about and keeping leeds on the back foot. NQC's structure and execution meant they didnt have to work as hard

I would go as far as saying I dont think NRL players are fitter than SL players in any meaningful way. I dont think they are particularly faster or more athletic. I just think they are better. What an SL player can do 8 times out of 10, an NRL player can do 99 times out of 100 and these are simple things.
You are right those little 1%s are the difference. But those 1%s are the pass being right on the button so the receiver isnt stretching or stuttering, the right pass being chosen, the bomb going that little bit higher, having that bit more spin on it, the grubber being that bit more accurate.

Its amazing how often NRL sides or Australia score "lucky" tries against us. Or "soft" tries. It just doesn't happen so much in reverse, because the Aussies generally make far fewer mistakes and in both attack and defence are quicker to react as a group.

The structured nature of their plays means they are always asking questions in attack, and in defence are used to facing the same so are better at reading plays.

All of it comes down to needing to be at a higher level week in week out and lets be honest a bigger pool of better players.

The Aussies are far more composed. If you watched Thurston he hardly broke sweat in the first half.

Absolutely not they do the basics very well punish every error and when they upped the gears their/JT's true class put the game away.
The only difference to us v NQC and the other 2 games was at least we made a game of it for the 1st 40 but as we well know a RL match is an 80 minute encounter.

With regards to my own post re-lucky tries i do think that the Coote and the last one (O'neil)? had plenty of luck about them but that didn't detract from them being a class above us.

The more I practice the luckier I get.