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.

Timing of the vote hasn't been great from a Leeds perspective. It's not beyond the bounds of possiblity that Burrow would have won it last year, rightly or wrongly, had the vote been held at the end of the season. Which to me is the most logical time to hold it.

Pretty much bang on for me. Even during 2007-2009 Leeds very much played the long game, and had some very poor performances. 2010-Present the rest of the league have caught up, which has meant that the results / performances have seemed worse

So we should be rewarding individuals who perform when there's nothing at stake? I disagree, reward those who produce the goods when it matters, consistently.

Don't really disagree with the crux of this, although I think you're selling Sinfield a little short (as is your wont I suppose). He's a great organiser and leader (those are natural gifts, augmented by hard work). He's also a very good goal kicker, more than decent tactical kicker and crucially tends to do both of the above best on the bigger occasions. He's an all-rounder, rather than a flashy show pony. There's room for both, I just felt his contribution, overall, to what Leeds were doing in 2005 than the rather more obvious offerings of Lyon to Saints in the same year. I can see both sides of the argument though.

Roby or Westwood for me. Don't think tomkins has been as good as either of the other two this year.
I'd probably vote roby

That's what Lance Todd and Harry Sunderland award are

Carl Ablett should win MOS.

You're a bear, what do you know about it?

It's because "THEY" hate us Pal. With a Passion. It's a Joke. I think we should all Pool together and Award Sinny with "The Man of Diamond" Award when he finally retires.

Ryan Bailey would have won it if he'd wanted to.

This.

Correct and I recall Eddie Hemmings (who used to get a vote) defending the decision by saying they tried and lean towards an English player.

If true, then whilst having the players vote isn't perfect, it's certainly better than leaving it the hands of clowns like Eddie and Stevo.