This.

I've enjoyed watching westwood more than the other two this year so he would get my vote

Westwood for me. Thought it a while back. Would be nice to see one of the workhorses getting the nod and not one of the fancy pants glamour players..

Westwood = Steel

Cap fits.......

Tomkins, like him or loathe him, is the most gifted player in the country. If it'd going to be a flashy back, it has to be him.

Roby has made up for an undeserved win in 2007 (should have been Trent Barrett IMO) by becoming the league's best #9 ever since. Can still make those trademark breaks, distributes pretty well and has a ludicrous, and oftne underestimated, workrate. Couldn't argue with him winning it. Should also captain England in the post-Peacock era IMO.

Westwood would be my choice. He's a blunt object rather than a precision instrument, but he's definitely steel. His defensive efforts can turn games. Machine.

As people have said abovem I wouldn't honestly say there was a year when a Leeds player should clearly have won MOS since Iestyn Harris. I still think Sinfield should have got the nod in 2005 but I can see why Lyon got it. I also think Sinfield would have been in the top 5 or 6 players in almost all those seasons. If MOS was awarded for consistency over a period of 12 or 13 years, he'd be a shoe-in.

There were Leeds players worthy, but I think the other players deserved it more

That's why I don't think his fellow professionals will vote for him and as I understand it it's the players who decide this one.

Was it changed from a group of journalists to the players after super-sub Roby robbed Barrett?

It's rather difficult to justify handing out the Man of Steel award to a player like Sinfield. He's a player who is fairly good at most things but not particularly outstanding or naturally gifted in any aspect of the game. He's not an exciting player who has fans on the edge of their seats in expectation. There's no x-factor, no pace and no extra gears, and his decision-making is of a manufactured, austere and theoretical nature. He's a jack of all trades and master of none who has made the most of his limitations through dedication and hard work.


Agree with that but the award isn't handed out to players on the basis of being consistent, organisational, steady and reliable. In another life, he'd be a librarian or involved in the actuarial profession. A long-service award would seem more befitting.

Westwood has been the most influential player this season. Roby the most consistent. Don't think Tomkins has been as effective in 2012 as he was in 2011. That said, JP has given Tomkins his vote (on twitter) & he's a far better judge than me, so I'm guessing the RFL's glory boy will be the winner. Don't think he's even been the most influential Wigan player this year to be honest (Finch)

As for Leeds, it's disgraceful Sinfield/JP have never been recognised. In a period that has seen us win 5 Grand Finals, the only recognition of this has been Tony Smith as coach of the year in 2006 (a year we won nothing!) Yet we apparently have the RFL in our pocket!!!

Jamie Peacock has been recognised.

He won MoS in 2003.

Oh, you're only interested in recognition for Leeds players... I get it.

Given this is a Leeds forum er, yes!
Given our period of 5 grand final victories started in 2004 er, yes!

Spot on otherwise though Bill

Just in case you hadn't realised... in fact it appears you haven't... the MoS is an [iindividual[/i award and not a [iteam[/i award. There is no qualificational requirement that any MoS winner must have played for a GF winning team.

Yes I'm well aware of that. Judging on the last 8 years It would appear playing in a GF winning team gives you little chance of winning the man of steel. I happen to think certain players are a victim of their own success. They set their own benchmark in terms of quality of performance - it becomes the norm. 1 season wonders, who come from nowhere, and quickly return to nowhere, but manage a season above their norm seem to be in a better position for recognition

I don't believe there's a qualificational requirement that any MoS winner must not play for a team which wins the GF either. That's because it's an individual award and not necessarily linked to a team award... a concept you appear unable to grasp.

You seem bitter that a team full of team players who shared the workload hasn't provided a single stand out individual player worthy of the MoS award when there's better individual players elsewhere more worthy.

You also seem unaware that in recent years, a team full of team players have been setting the benchmark for producing inconsistent performances which lack quality during the regular season, therefore they are not even providing a worthy team player these days who might be considered an outsider for the MoS award.

That applies to the last 2 years. I'm perfectly aware it's an individual award, thanks for labouring that one. I personally believe a benchmark for a top player is to be a winner. A team is made up of individuals after all.