I think he's spot on about the Buderus/Diskin issue and the McGuire point.

We looked loads more structured with two halves and a running LF. Maybe with McGuire, Burrow and Sinny we have too many chiefs and not enough Indians?

Until McGuire stops impersonating a headless chicken then it's Burrow and Sinfield for the halves.

Yes He is right on that. Doesnt stop him being a stroppy cow though.

McGuire was poor when he came on. Not much worse than every other player on our side though. The lack of depth across the park was astonishing, especially compared to the 1st half. A flat attack is all well and good when it's done at pace. Second half it was flat and static. Everything seemed to be up the middle, with no shape outwide whatsoever. This has been the case in each of the games we've played poorly this season, and needs addressing.

This is one of the key factors that needs fixing at the moment, you've summarised pretty well, it shouldn't be about removing McGuire but fundamentally changing his game.

His basic instinct is to run the ball, utilising pace and elusiveness that has served him so well for the best part of 20 years. If he is to move his career successfully into its next stage, his initial priority should be to pass the ball and look to create for team mates. Take the ball on the move, and put colleagues into gaps. He has that passing game in his armoury but it appears infrequently as he dances like a headless chicken.

He's a great player, and will continue to score tries for fun; what Leeds need now is a great stand off in the traditional sense. I reckon thats the solution to the slightly stale half back combination in the long term as Sinfield will only ever be a quality stand in stand off.

McGuire is a wonderful elusive runner and backer up but has never been an ideal SO. In the first half Sinfield gave shape to our attack which was lost when McGuire came on. However I must say that the second half performance from the pack was woeful and that made McGuire's job much more difficult

1st Half

2nd Half

Timings of errors:

1st Half - 1, 5, 6, 14, 20, 23, 25, 29, 36, 39

2nd Half - 40, 45, 52, 55, 58, 58, 61, 63, 66, 71, 73, 77, 78

Edit: As per F R's post below.

Only playing fella, although I do wonder where these weird and wonderful stats come from? Do you compile them yourself?

I know.

These were all my own work on re-viewing the match on Sky.

Not sure where they sit with the Leeds Buderus - good, Leeds Diskin - bad or first half - good, second half - bad factions on here though.

There just looks to be too many being committed throughout the eighty minutes and it's a recurring theme.

So do I (and so do the timings) so can the imaginary 2nd half forward pass and pretend I never mentioned it.

Some games this year McGuire has been praised for playing his best ever rugby and being "the complete stand off", now he's the reason why Leeds didn't play well.

What were the statistics for metres made by the two Leeds hookers?

How do stats quantify quality of distribution? The kind Jamie Peacock talks about him his book as being of vital importance for any forward making a hit up?

I presume you're after Buderus and Diskin. What follows will be the raw data from Opta at the SL Website which obviously will be a total figure regardless of time spent on the field or position played during that time.

Danny BuderusMatt Diskin

They don't.