I'd suggest Wigan and Warrington.

Yes. I've seen games where substitutes are un-used. I've seen games where substitites are given 5-7 mins game time. I've seen us use less players over the easter period in 2012 than any other team.

It's about balance. I've made many positive comments about players from Monday's game. I've sung the praises of Hardaker, Burrow, Singleton, McShane, Baldwinson.

When analysing the 1st try I apportioned blame to players I praised and defended Kirke for his role.

It's a message board for discussion. There will be positive, there will be negative.

Given the inconsitent league form the team has shown under McDermott's tenure, the negative might be a little louder than it was when we were more consistent.

Also, Kirke is just a big fat bag of .

Who knew the swear filture would replace w**k with helpful. How helpful.

I sometimes like a good helpful

Are our tries conceded going to be analysed on a weekly basis or just when Kirke is involved?

The swear filter is w**k

EDIT: Didn't change it for me

They are. Just the other week Juan and TVOC debated a try involving Ryan Hall ad nauseum.

But, regardless, feel free to analyse and stimulate discussion after any game about any player. It's why we're here isn't?

I am having a helpful right now !!!!

No double standards R. The first choice players already in the champions squad have earned their places by playing at the highest level in all competitions. These youngsters have earned no more than the right to be considered when the opportunity arises. That does not mean they should take the place of an out of form champion who has earned the right for time to get previously proven match winning form back. eg last season

Having spent many years in rugby development I also want to see the talented youngsters coming through but they have to be ready mentally and physically. Often when they come in for injured stars it is a good time as the pressure is off them and allowances made. If a star is dropped to accomodate a youngster then that creates additional pressure which can mean nerves or trying too hard to impress cause errors that otherwise would not have happened.



Nothing is 100% right in my eyes. However I choose to give the benefit of the doubt to players and coaches who have proven themselves repeatedly at Champion level.



Nobody is saying that. Would you like me to stop posting my 100% disagreement with your opinions on this subject? (To be fair it is only 90% disagreement but that wouldn't have sounded as good. I do see your point but I disagree with it.)



Well I will agree with you that nobody should play indefinately. But when contracts are being extended none of us are in the know regarding what real options that are available at the time so again I refrain from being too critical or from making the same criticism repeatedly.



I have always said that when you play youngsters you should expect and allow some mistakes as its all part of the learning process. However, and this is the coaches dilemma, what risk do you take with unproven young talent when you also need to win each game? The first part of the season for Leeds has been tough and when we had the run of form through some big games it is understandable the coach wanted to keep a settled side and make sure of the points. Then we went into a period where most of the side hit a drop in form. Do you then drop a star who is trying to get his form back?

Take the Widnes game for example. There were enough mistakes from experienced and youngsters alike to have lost this match had it been against stronger opposition. But my point is the exerienced players have proven they do not usually make those mistakes whereas it is most likley that the youngsters will continue to make mistakes for some time to come which is part of their development. As I say this is a coach's dilemma when blooding new players All i'm sayng is stick to the policy and transition plans that we have done for the last 10yrs ACROSS THE WHOLE SQUAD.'"

They rumour I have heard is that wire were interested and west tigers have made an offer. Baldwinson wants to play and stay at leeds and is very passionate about Playing for Leeds. Leeds have messed around and have made a poor offer and peed the lad off, New Zealand warriors have also made an better offer, the lad would prefer to stay at leeds than go to the Nrl and its up to the chief GE to pay him for his potential, over to you Garry ! We have moved griffin on and I would expect leeds would be happy to move
Moore and clarkson on also IMO of course.

My opinion regarding Baldwinson's options are:
1: If the lad genuinely wants to try his luck in the NRL, then good luck to the kid and i hope that he makes a success of it over there
2: If Jordan really wants to stay at the Rhinos but is being offered peanuts, Then i say go and take the move that's best for him, but that it's not only about money if he stops in SL and moves to another club
3: If GH is playing a game of Russian Roulette with these young kids by believing that they won't go. Then it won't be long before we lose a top player or even more or them for that matter and ones that could and would have gladly played for us for the foreseeable future

Our squad need re-rejuvenating and especially in our forwards so now is the time IMO to hang onto our cherished juniors like Baldwinson

Careful....it doesn't pay to question the professionals and qualified staff that make these decisions. We all need to collectively agree and never ever question those that know best

Yes we need to instead unquestionably believe rumours about wage offers.....that's much better

And if we did, then one I heard a few years ago is that at the start of his career JJB was on 'peanuts' for quite a while......I doubt that he's regretting his decision.