I'd say Burrows miss prior to H/T was just as crucial and imo would have sent us in on front foot and able to absorb the horror start to the 2nd half better and maybe even more importantly save us from playing "catch up" RL for the last 20!
I'm proud of the teams efforts and in no way should my comments detract from a huge effort on the night by the lads but my opinion remains the same when assesing individual performances in detail.

Burrow is a great tackler (and I have a ton of respect for how well he does in defence), where he defends. He wouldn't cope however with defending in the middle though and this is why they don't put him there. If it was about energy levels and keeping him fresh then why not give him 15 mins on the bench at the start of the 2nd half? Those tired forwards of the opposition have just had a nice half time breather and we aren't as noted for starting halves as well as other teams. Even in the successful 4 Playoff games of 2012 we conceded the first try in 7 of the 8 halves of rugby we played, also all 4 halves of the CC/WCC Finals, especially early in the 2nd half.....

Wakefield - 42 mins
Catalans - 48 mins
Wigan - 42 mins
Warrington GF - 44 mins
Melbourne - 44 mins
Warrington CC - 48 mins

Anyone else spotting a pattern here that needs working on????



I think the biggest risk is highlighted above in my previous answer. Does having a back rower coming off after 30 mins for an extra hooker really work? Burrow is one of our main strike players, but after half-time it's usually the opposition that is striking.

Are we finally grasping why McShane isn't a SL standard starting hooker?

The kid's got some positiives to his game, but he cannot be trusted to defend centrally and Leeds can't hide him anywhere like they do with Burrow and McGuire.

Is that judged purely from the Storm game or from other examples?

I haven't watched the game back, but that one tackle aside I don't remember his defense being that bad.

This was something I picked up on and commented upon early last season. It was either Hall or BJB that were copping some flak on here for perceived defensive frailties. I observed and pointed out that the person defending inside the winger would change from set to set causing a great deal of confusion throughout the team.

To say he is not SL is a bit harsh but his defense can be a worry sometimes, but we have been spoilt by Buderus (who had the best tackle technique I've ever seen in SL) and Diskin who was/is very solid in defense.

We won 2 trophies not one! and got to the the final of the only other competition. In all of this Burrow was a key player at 9. Is that not remarkable success? and is not even more remarkable to do it for a 2nd year running?

Lunt more often than not came on for a back rower and then shared distribution and allowed Burrow more freedom.

The previous year the policy of bring Burrow on at was crucial in us winning the Championship from a historic 5th place. Was that not remarkable too?

We know you don't like Burrow and you obviously like it even less when he keeps proving your judgement to be wrong.

And back in the real world, we won the previous year because we finally realised that you need to start with quality hookers and leave them on for as long as possible, using wee Robbie as an impact sub. That was why we achieved that success. Not because of starting Burrow at hooker

I guess that's alright then, it's not like they are well rewarded full-time professional players (and coaches) aiming to win a record breaking 4th World Club Challenge in front of a sold out stadium and a live TV audience or anything.



Didn't we have this conversation last year and wasn't your position then that defensive patterns stay pretty much intact even after contact with the opposition? You now appear to be producing caveats when addressing two examples in what would be the opening five (?) defensive sets of an actual game. Players relatively fresh and alert, knowing their roles without the complication of substitues being introduced. Perhaps the pretty much intact comment warranted testing a little further.

On the first mis-alignment it followed a McGuire kick from the right. He didn't have much time to shift back left and stayed right throughout that next defensive set. On the fourth Moon was signalling for re-inforcements on the left (and McGuire waved back) the problem there for mine were the central defenders not realising McGuire had swtched flanks and making an adjustment to compensate. Is the structure too rigid that it can't adjust, is the talk not good enough man to man, was the full-back communicating with his defensive line?

The second case on eleven minutes was a little different though. The starting hooker was supporting a break down the centre when McGuire's offload to Jones-Buchanan was ruled forward. As it was on the last a turnover was ruled. The hooker for some reason decided to go left flank instead of right even though that represented a longer journey. Again as before there was confusion and no adjustment from the central defenders to compensate, this time leaving Sinfield exposed.

And in Gotcha world you've been claiming this team was finished for several years so why should anyone take your opinions on why you think we've been successful seriously?

Did I say it's alright?

The question is whether Leeds' defensive alignment is being compromised on occasions by using a converted half-back who cannot defend the ruck. While in theory it's possible to do so by shifting additional defensive responsibilities on to the loose-forward does it work well in practice?

Prior to Burrow being used as a starting hooker I don't recall noting he and McGuire stood side by side in the defensive line too often - presenting opponents with a rather obvious target to attack - whereas over the course of this season and last it's becoming a fairly common sight.

While both can and generally do defend well out wide (one on either flank) you wouldn't want them together having a big forward heading their way, especially when close to the line. It's also been the case where players on the opposite flank when this has happened over the last two games (Moon V Melbourne and Ablett V St Helens) have been left waving for re-inforcements as the defensive line has become unbalanced and failed to adjust.

But of course our esteemed coach has noticed this and cannot be criticised for his selection policy: the 17 chosen are obviously the best at training the house down