would like to think so, but can't imagine he will. Those are 2 names that have been thrown about, but no solid rumours. The only real rumours for us are Heath L'Estrange and Andy Lynch...

I'd like to have seen us make more of an effort to keep Burgess too. He's had obvious flaws in his game over the past few years, but this year he's seemed to be ironing them out and looks like turning into a very good prop in the near future. We've all heard that he wants to try his hand in Australia with his brothers, and fair enough. But we could have at least *tried* to keep him.

What's more likely to change his mind? Playing him every week and showing him that he'd be giving up a spot as an important member of the squad if he leaves, or leaving him on the sidelines for a month and saying we rate him lower that Ian Kirke? If his mind wasn't made up, McDermott's made it up for him. Why would he accept a 3-year deal with us as things stand?

Also re Burgess, even if he does leave for Aus, we may well want him back whether it works out for him or not. No point in burning any bridges with him.

Generally if a player is announced to be leaving I don't see any reason not to pick them (unless they're going to yawnion, in which case they should be burned at the stake).

This post is so over the top incorrect.

A lot on here keep going on abou Maguire at Wigan. What he had was a massive overhaul of the squad to change their fortunes. He had exactly what Leeds had in 2003, a lot of class youngsters to choose from which were ready, and added experience like Deacon and Riddell to it. Huge changes happened at Wigan compared to what Noble did before him. Personally I still have always been of the opinion that Wigan got lucky last year due to the injuries Saints and Leeds had, and this season is proving me something correct.

I already showed last week how Smith had overhauled the playing squad at Wire in order to get where they are now. He took the club backwards as far as the league was concerned in his first season at Wire. Then with player changes took it forward significantly.

Let's look at Friday honestly. For 50 minutes of that game Leeds were the better side. Most posters accept they put in a very good first half. So if it is all ok for 50 minutes, what is happening for the other 30 minutes? Do people seriously believe that the coach is giving instructions from the sidelines to say "ok we have done enough good things now, lets go crap"? Is he hell, so something is wrong out on the field.

Do you not believe we would have performed any better this season with a different coaching setup?

Confidence and belief that they will win is not there. You should know that much of what a team accomplishes is based on iron clad self belief. Saints have it, we don't. It's leaked out of this squad over the last 12 months and McDermott and Lowes have just made more holes in the barrell I'm afraid.

Confidence is built from defence. If you believe in your defensive structure, technique and communication then you will have enough confidence in what you can do should you lose the ball to try things with it.

Some good points here - I said before if Wigan get to the GF this year the team will have 6/7 changes from the team that won last years GF. These squad change rounds happened at most clubs every year.

I don't agree with the last paragraph - I think Leeds were still in the game but the balance of play in the first half was well in Saints favour - I can hardly remember a serious attempt on the Saints line in the first half. The second half panned out how I would of expected - a Leeds defence short on energy against a Saints attack with plenty left in the tank.

Yup - not coincidence that in the last two games once Leeds have gone two scores behind they've capitulated having been competitive for the preceding 45-50 minutes.

I'd also question whether some of the senior players still have the desire to do anything other than swan around chelping at match officials or throwing the ball down in frustration after every error. Saints and Warrington have both looked not only more confident, but also a damned sight hungrier over the last two weeks - like the Leeds side of 2004-2009 in fact.

At least half a dozen of the current first team squad shouldn't be pulling on a Leeds shirt in 2012 IMO.

Whether a change in coach is going to stop players making basic errors and putting in half-hearted efforts on the field is another matter. Moan all you like about team selection, but does anyone seriously think that including Burgess, Clarkson and Pitts or giving McShane more game time would have changed the last two results?

Agreed.

It's hardly supririsnig though is it? They're bound to be hungrier given how Siants haven't won it since 2006 and Warrington since 1720 or something.

A change of coach might.

That's nail on head for me! There just seems like there's no desire to win. I would say that is down to the coach not the players. I can't decide if he is slagging them all off making them feel worthless, or blowing wind up their making them feel like all they have to do is turn up on the night to win!

I have tried to defend BMD to an extent to see his potential, let him settle, but as soon as I heard the Warrington team sheet I could no longer find any plausible excuses!

Hardly! Please highlight, in context, the contradictory statements.

I fear you are right. The malaise appears deep....still doesn't excuse the dropping of players who appeared more in form....or, in the case of Burrow, dropping him to the bench just when he seemed to be back to his best line breaking running confidence.

Agree but I think it is a combination of players. Poor coaching as we seem to have no structure, and poor squad selection and decisions. The coach doesn't make any sense at all in his interviews so I cannot imagine what the team talks are like!!!!