With all the experiences in our team do you not think the players should be able to think 'you know what this isnt working, lets try something slightly different'?

Players shouldn't need to be told to offload or support a player in attack, it should be something natural that happens

I cant imagine McDermott doesnt have them running dummy runners and different plays in training, IMO its the players not taking things from the training ground to the pitch

But Brian McD IS going to the training, so where does this leave the point you are making?

You'd think so. But surely the coach would have addressed it and things would have changed. Let's be honest, it's not just this year out attack looks stagnant. So either they are his tactics and the players won't divert from them or the players aren't listening to a word he says and ignoring the last weeks training. I know which option I'd go for.

Don't you think experienced players with so many titles would be good at taking their coaches plan onto the pitch and executing it?

The thing is that it's the sort of tough pay that has won us titles. Grand finals are nearly always won by a small margin on a tight game.

Last season we ran out of bodies but we should never underestimate the affect of being tougher than the opposition

That's kinda the reason I don't mind us not hammering opposition by massive scorelines like Wire and Wigan often do and have done in the recent past.

I do think the problem that has stopped the last 3 LLS winners even reaching the GF has been lack of tough and close games during the year. People say that England's problem at international level is lack of close and intense games.....well the last 3 LLS winners have pretty much strolled through the year with minimal tests.

So when we get pushed by the likes of HKR or lose to Wakey, whilst frustrating or disappointing at the time it probably does us more good in the long run than going through the motions with a 40-50 point stroll from the 1st minute of the game.

Look at Warrington's run in 2011 and the complete lack of close games from April 15th (Round 10) onwards

W 64-6
W 60-0
L 10-24
W 58-14
W 80-0
W 62-0
W 112-0
W 42-6
W 56-16
L 16-18
W 46-16
W 35-28
W 48-18
W 28-16
W 54-24
L 24-44 to Wigan in CC QF
W 66-12
W 25-12
W 39-12
W 34-12
W 47-0
L 24-26 to a Leeds in playoffs

13 of those 18 wins were by 30 points or more, only one was less than a 12 point win.

Wigan's 2012 season is perhaps even more noticeable. They won 25 games in all competitions and only ONE was by less than 12 points and that was against HKR away.

Both lost to us in the playoffs and both had strolls in the first week of the playoffs, Wire beat Hudds 47-0 in 2011 & Wigan beat Catalans 46-6 in 2012. Hardly the tough preparation you need to claim a GF.

I don't mind us getting pushed, I'm just concerned at our ability to win these tight games. It's something we don't seem to have right now. In the past I'm pretty certain we'd have won at least 2 or 3 of the close games we've drawn or lost.
Most notably Wakey away & Cas at home.

If Leeds had kept 13 players on the field I believe they would have won the Cas match by continuing to grind it out. Leeds were in control until Sinfield's shocking brain fart.

As for Wakey...uggh!

On this we can agree

As has been mentioned for Cas it was a Sinfield brainfart and against Wakey we were missing a ton of experience on the pitch.

I don't think the Cas result had anything to do with the Sinfield brainfart of the sending off. Unless you lot are not on about the sending off?

Yes, it was down to a Sinfield brainfart, but that was not going for the drop earlier, and using his head to win the game. With or without the sending off, the frustration had already set in, and Cas like they did last night, were always going to give it a last hurrahhhh.

As for soft. I was speaking with Brett Ferres a couple of weeks back and he was giving it the same old same old, that always goes through the game, that Leeds have no underbelly, they do not like it when you are in their face, and too soft. I gave him the same line, of we have enough GF wins to show different, and his response was we are talking about two different teams mate.

We still should've been able to (and would've done in the past in my opinion) get a drop goal over v Cas. Either before or after Sinfield's sending off.
V Wakey I think in the past we'd have ground it out and kept Wakey further away from our line to prevent them scoring their final try.

Tried the drop goal but it appears Peacock looks exactly like McGuire

Well if anyone know about a soft underbelly it's Brett Ferris.

I beg to differ. When Sinfield was sent off we were leading 24-18 and looking in control. To lose our main organiser, skipper and goal kicker was an enormous blow. His red carding gave Cas a huge lift and made Leeds minus a defender.

So it is nonsense to pretend that this didn't effect the result. Furthermore had Sinfield remained on the field it is more likely that he would have taken the latter drop goal attempt instead of JP with more chance of it going over so I would argue his sending off was easily the main reason for not winning. If you regard Sinfield not dropping a goal earlier as a brainfart then what do you call Bailey leaving a huge gap under the posts (6 points)

I will agree with you that he could have possibly got one right at the death where Peacock bombed (although potentially him taking the kick off could also have given a different play for Cas on the return), but I still disagree that his sending off had any more bearing on the result, than what he failed to do whilst he was on the pitch. It's those earlier minutes where a win was taken away from us, not the sending off.