Sinfield has stated his preference on which position he wished to play (not solely restricted to his club career - although that depends how you interpret comments made by Brian Noble as far back as 2004.)

Burrow has stated he prefers to start and that is what he is used to doing.

Both, publically at least, will be happy to play in whichever position they are selected and that would inlude starting on the bench.

Stating a preference for a position is quite different from "Sinfield's decision to only play standoff "

Lunt was awesome in defence on Friday night, absolutely hammered Hock. After hearing Hetherington's interview on Yorkshire Radio, I don't think Lunt will be a Rhinos player next season.

Is it?

Sinfield has started 69 of the last 72 games in the halves 66 of those at stand-off. The 3 non half-back starts were in June 2011 and coincided with McGuire's return from knee reconstruction surgery.

Prior to McGuire's return it was Sinfield/Burrow in the halves - since his return it's basically been Sinfield/McGuire (when all three have been available) with Burrow the one to make way.

Is anyone seriously (aside from Juan obviously) going to argue Sinfield's wish hasn't been acceded to by his favourite coach of all time?

An alternative theory is that both recognise (rightly or wrongly) that Sinfield's best position is stand off, as opposed to McDermott having yielded to some sort of ultimatum.

Yes.
Likewise I might say I have a preference for pizza, it doesn't mean it's the only food I'll ever eat.

The fact that he's been picked there is irrelevant. Unless you're going to claim BJB and Hall have stated they will only play on the wing, JJB has decided he'll only play 2nd row, etc.

Great game from Lunt, hope we can keep hold of him for next season! Always rated the lad, surprised Hudds didnt want him!

Do you know something we don't?

I meant for this season, with the loss of Moore and Lee, im guesssing he will be back at Hudds for 2013

Sinfield has had a virtual lock on the stand-off position after stating it was the position he wanted to play. Whether he's a pizza or a pasta man is up to others to decide.



If you say so but personally speaking if he played mainly loose-forward before stating his preference but since has played almost exclusively in his position of choice I'd say it's either relevant or a remarkable coincidence if the two are not in some way linked.

This.

Not as much fun for some people though I suppose.

It is possible that McDermott thinks Sinfield is his best option at 6, so that's where he plays him.

No apparently for some. McDermott the no nonsense straightforward ex-royal marine with tremendous backing from GH must have caved into the demands of probably the most humble, always quick to praise his teammates instead of himself, captain of the team.......suddenly Sinfield is a demanding drama queen refusing to play any other position. Of all rumours I've heard all year this is the most laughable.

Why does it have to be that he is a 'drama queen' ?? Is it beyond comprehension that in a position of strength - as probably Leeds's most successful captain - he has stated his preference with dignity and reasoning. Namely that he can potentially continue to lead Leeds to continued further success IF spared the grind and greater risk of injury commensurate to playing in the middle against nasty debilitating forwards. Sounds plausible to me. In return he might well give reciprocal, flattering credit where he thinks due.

Fitting McGuire in at SH is a comfortable solution to this argument; fitting Burrow in at hooker less so. Starting on the bench here is a better solution, but maybe not to Burrow's liking. He too has a position of strength: how many big matches has he been the x-factor difference in winning silverware ? Player power doesn't have to mean histrionics: in fact it's more probably less successful in achieving what you want.

Of course that's possible and it's even understandable for half the game. Sinfield has always operated as a half-back ball in hand anyway so the only change is in his defensive positioning. It was that aspect that Sinfield was specific about. If Leeds wanted to see the maximum length of career from him they had to lesson his defensive workload. They have but his lack of pace is regularly exposed out wide so there is a cost associated with the move.

Burrow starts at hooker but defends as he always has out on the left inbetween the centre and wing. This results in the need to find increased hiding places in the defensive line and or the doubling up of McGuire and Burrow on the same flank giving an obvious target for a second row or centre to aim at - fend off McGuire who has a tendency to flap at big men or pass over Burrow as despite him being an excellent defender he's not really equipped to wrap up man and ball.

The defensive line can become unbalanced with players over compensating to protect the left flank which leads to overlaps on the right available to teams able to move the ball at pace. Can't see that being an issue at Old Trafford though.