take his fat sidekick and **** off back to Bradford?

Give them a motivational speech.............send them out to lose

Get them to watch the 94 and 95 CC finals on a small tv in the dressing room pre match.

Throw in the 2000, 2003 2005 and 2010 cc finals.

His tactics should be to give Sinfield and JP the floor in the changing rooms before the game and at HT.

Hopefully he will realise before saturday that sinfield isnt and never will be a stand off and play burrow and maguire from the start
I know its not gonna happen but hey i can hope

Quote: BigM "Hopefully he will realise before saturday that sinfield isnt and never will be a stand off '" www.therhinos.co.uk/rugby/110.ph ... ixid=79294 www.therhinos.co.uk/rugby/110.ph ... ixid=79305 www.therhinos.co.uk/rugby/110.ph ... ixid=89722 www.therhinos.co.uk/rugby/110.ph ... ixid=79323

Quote: BigM "Hopefully he will realise before saturday that sinfield isnt and never will be a stand off '" www.therhinos.co.uk/rugby/110.ph ... ixid=79294 www.therhinos.co.uk/rugby/110.ph ... ixid=79305 www.therhinos.co.uk/rugby/110.ph ... ixid=89722 www.therhinos.co.uk/rugby/110.ph ... ixid=79323

If watkins' injury is as bad as feared then the best we can hope for is that he'll select the 17 in their best positions from whats available.

Webb
Hall
Ablett
Smith
Bjb
Mcguire
Burrow
Peacock
Buderus
Bailey
Jjb
Delaney
Sinfield

Leuluai
Hauraki
Clarkson
Ali

Agree with BigM but it won't happen.
Tactically and analytically BM is about as useful as lump of mouldy cheese

He said "sinfield isnt and never will be a stand off" which was nonsense. I haven't commented on whether him or McGuire/Burrow are preferred options.

FWIW I fully understand the idea of not playing McGuire and Burrow together as they are not in any way a conventional halfback pairing and are and always have been reliant on Sinfield to do a fair chunk of the hard creative work that other teams rely on their halfbacks for. Therefore there is a tactical integrity to Sinfield starting at 6 since he is doing a lot of the functions of the role, plus it opens up an additional grunt space on the bench as we don't have to carry the second hooker. All of which presupposes that he stays there for the entire game and completely abandons his normal role when starting in the 13 position, which he doesn't.

Personally I would have signed a proper creative halfback many years ago but the club became wed to the idea of McGuire+Burrow and, with Sinfield's presence, it seemed to work. But to try and pretend McDermott is some sort of crazed nutter for deciding Sinfield+1 is a more promising option is, in my opinion, delusional, and seems to fail to understand exactly what it is he does.

I wonder just what it would take for MAC to lose his job?I hope this is not going to go on like the Cullen saga at Warrington or McNamara at Bradford.

I'm gutted to say it but there is noway Kirke is getting dropped.

I would rather play Clarkson at centre than Smith - who has shown nothing to deserve a place. If push really came to shove then I would gamble on Hardaker who I think has really good game awareness

I think another factor in picking Sinfield at 6 is that it means we can have a no.13 whose metre per carry ratio isn't as poor.
Whether Sinfield is picked at 6 or 13 he more or less plays the same role anyway (in attack).