Jesus, they are so hit and miss his posts.

Would Hall or Briscoe have give us an improvement on Handley? no they wouldn't. Infact Hall was a massive liability before his injury.

Would Moon have been an improvement on Keinhorst last few games? Not he wouldn't.

Ablett has played enough games this year, and the results or performance have not changed.

We are certainly missing McGuire and Ward, who would have been an improvement on there replacements, but that is it. And not sure either would have made diddly squat difference to most of the majority of the losses.

No leadership is a serious issue, pointed out by some before the season, and again is not relevant to injuries though, as we don't have it.

He'd have been an improvement on Watkins though, on current form.

Don't dissagree. But lets be honest about it, he wouldn't have replaced him would he?

Probably not but we could then put Keinhorst to 2nd row instead of Achurch.

IF we select on form alone then Achurch Watkins & Hall would be playing for Fev.

You're going on the basis that their poor form would've definitely continued, which it MIGHT have done but by no means a guarantee. Burrow was dire earlier in the year but has put in some good showings recently. Garbutt is improving from his early form and despite the criticism I think Galloway has improved. Very possible some of our absentees would've picked up their form if they weren't injured.

There is no criticism of the effort for the most part - there are players who appear to not giving 100% or not performing as they should - Achurch, Watkins, Galloway are these really showing a hunger/desire/will to win?

Why are the players knackered they have played less than half a season - a disrupted pre-season yes but by now they should be hitting their straps in terms of match fitness.

How many players on Friday were playing injured - Hardaker irresponsible to play him imo, they dropped Singleton to play Cuthbertson so you can only assume he was fit.

On McDermott - I don't see a logical game plan - it may be boring but dumb the plan down to trying to gain territory - all this off the cuff stuff is OK when you have all guns firing. The less said about the defensive structures and the lack of desire to defend the line the better.

Leadership is a huge issue - on Friday Cuthbertson and Ferris as experienced players let their team mates down and need a word in their ear during the game - there is trying and there is headless plays both these players came up with far too many of the latter. Leeds are compounding their other issues with suicidal plays on the field.

That is a difficult conundrum - Handley imo has been excellent and doesn't deserve to lose his place until he shows a significant deterioration in form.

It could be that some players just aren't as good as they looked in a winning side with Sinfield and Peacock at its heart?

Even if you keep Handley on one wing their's still another wing. I believe Hall will be fit before Briscoe, despite Hall's poor form earlier in the year wouldn't you pick him ahead of Golding for the other wing spot hoping that his enforced absence/break could've been just what he needed.

Walters retiring speed is appalling; it worries me every time he's involved in a tackle that if he's not a marker then there'll be a massive gap in the defensive line.

Agreed - providing his enforced lay off means he can still get his shirt on

It is to be hoped his enforced layoff doesn't mean he's going to return looking like a suntan-injecting mincer from a local gym hangout.

He has got previous after all, and that's without referencing his often liberal use of hair dye.