The use of Burrow at loose forward on Leeds' scrum-feed was a bit of a departure from the norm (although it was used at least once at Castleford last week - where he produced a shocking ball that Hall rescued) as it would more usually be Ablett there but Sinfield I think was tasked in the normal manner.

All scrums that are set on the right hand side of the field (from a Leeds point of view) are fed by Sinfield while similarly all scrums on the left hand side are fed by McGuire. This is the case whenever Leeds have the feed, irrespective of whether the scrum is twenty metres from the opponents line or twenty metres from their own. Similarly they do likewise on defensive scrums to basically keep them in the right areas for the defensive set to follow.

I said the tactics for an excuse.

He didn't play well at all IMO. He played for himself and was successful once out of about 40 attempts, resulting in Watkins try. We were lucky to win last night and the hooking position should have been changed when we went 12-0 up.

Disagree. A passing game's fine so long as we're going forward. Most teams achieve that through the graft of the forwards - we have the luxury of Burrow or McGuire by way of an alternative method of gaining the necessary momentum to make our passing effective. In fact last night I'd say that Wire's forwards and passing game were roughly equal to our own. What they didn't have was the type of threat that Burrow poses.

I agree with Gotcha, was Burrow playing for himself or the team?

He made very little head way - no wonder Warrington knew exactly what he was going to do - as a tactic it should be used sparingly not instead of hard graft from the forwards.

Hookers should be spotting the areas of weakness in the defensive line and passing it that way not running into one of the two markers.

Burrow always plays for the team imo but I agree the tactic was overused last night. Running from dummy half or the base of the scrum should be done now and again or if a gap is spotted. He seemed to run at least once in every set last night. Burrow was tackled more times in possesion last night than any other game I can think off.

At times last night I thought we could've done with McShane's distribution from the ptb last night. I'm not sticking the boot into Hood but watching him and McShane passing between each other in the warm at Cas McShane's passing was much sharper. Hood is clearly highly rated by the coaching staff and has shown his enthusiasm and eye for the line. Didn't think Burrow's running was as effective last night, thought he got caught by the markers when a pass was more appropriate, however he was a threat and proved that with his break.

All in all, didn't think he was MOM but didn't think he was bad as some on here are saying. Some people just love to moan. The coaching staff clearly think this is the way to go and the results thus far have been good, I reckon they're in a better position to choose the team and how they play better than I.

That's a strange question to ask.

Is he only playing for the team when he successfully makes the break? And if he fails he's playing for himself? FWIW I thought Wire read him well last night but I'd say he was playing for the team.

Course you do

I am certain that our coaching staff still don't know which is our strongest team,
Position wise that is.

Burrow seemed to do a lot of running around in circles, like a leaping gazelle that buzzing its tits off. Only to get tackled a metre further forward from where he started

So Ian Kirke had just an important role in his GF winning teams as Kevin Sinfield!!

Buderus' quality towards the end of the 2011 season was the difference between winning the GF and not even getting past the likes of Warrington. He was by far the most influential player in the team and dragged the defensive effort out of the team almost single-handed.

On Diskin - I see no difference between now and post knee injury - the injury prevented him being one of the finest players British players of the SL era - sadly.

what a load of rubbish. burrows job was to move the big warrington pack around. he consistently ran at carvell, morley, westwood and the rest, often getting battered. he was unselfish in his job. he created little but did his job brilliantly. often in the next play or two after a run we found gaps.

Quite right. Burrow was a constant threat and tired out their big forwards by moving them around in a way that gave his own forwards a breather. How is this playing for himself?. It is a good tactic for Burrow not to pack down in the front row as his speed is better utilised from the back of the scrum. Burrow is proving that you can be a success at 9 with a different style and he is a major reason for our good start this year. My choice for MOM was Sinfield but Burrow was a close second.