I agree! But Huddersfield weren't THAT much better than us on Friday. Annoyingly, most of the game was played in their half.

My point is; If we were giving it 100% and simply unable to beat them due to our massive injury list, and the quality of our players that would be fine. We just don't seem to be even trying. I'd put us at 50% effort AT BEST. The crowd, coaching staff, players, everybody KNOWS that the team that played on Friday night was more than capable of putting up a much MUCH better fight than that. That is what is frustrating.

Fair enough. As much as we were well short of previous seasons in the end, we beat Saints to reach a major final and won at Wigan in the play-offs before finishing 80 minutes from Old Trafford. Of course, we could still repeat those feats under the current regime. The question for GH is still; how confident are you that the current coach can turn it round, even to that extent?

In making that decision, why and how does track record (this isn't aimed at you by the way) not come into it. McClennan had a CV behind him at this point last season with 2 Super League titles, one WCC and a very much unfancied Tri-Nations win on it. That is more likely to inspire faith at a time of difficulty than anything our current staff have.

This will, of course, be a decision for other people. They may decide to back the coach and be proved right to have done so. I'm not about to tell Gary Hethrington how to run a rugby league club. I think it looks a fairly risky gamble at this point.

So performances don't come into it at all? What did Saints do last season and did they make changes?

We may well have reached a major final, which FWIW was very lucky to come up against an injury hit Saints side on the day, but we put in some awful performances last season. We showed a regressive performance to what we produced in 2009, which was a further regression to what we did in 2008. Why is that pattern ignored?



Couldn't agree more. So why did a coach as good as that end up with a team going backwards each year in terms of performances, yet somehow people think just simply making a change to coach now would make a difference with the same players?

Let's be honest here. Can you honestly say that you think we would be better and in a better position right now had McClennan still been the coach?

I'm not ignoring it. The players do need to have a long, hard look at themselves too. I still think the last two performnances showed all the hallmarks of poor coaching.



Change was needed, and this was widely advertised as a transition season. We needed new blood, and we have got some, with Watkins, Jones-Bishop, McShane etc becoming more regular first-teamers, and the likes of Clarkson gaining more experience by the week. That doesn't excuse being a disorganised rabble.

Would we be sensational with McClennan in charge? Probably not. Would we be better than we are now? Impossible to say, but if you're asking for my opinion and gut instinct, then I think better coaches will get better results. So, yes.

And yet we still have the same points as at the same stage of last season. Surely with 20 points to play for the best coaches (in this case McClennan) would surely have at least a couple more points than someone like McDermott (if he really is that much poorer)?

And all this despite it been widely accepted by all that we are currently missing two of our best three players. Not something we had last season.

Coach McClennan had the sizeable distraction of preparing for the WCC to work around.

In the remaining 17 rounds of the SL Regular season Leeds won 13 (and reached the Challenge Cup Final - after defeating Hull, Blackpool, Wigan and St Helens) - time will tell how close coach McDermott's Leeds will come to matching that record.



Fair point but in the opening ten SL Regular Rounds last season, Peacock missed three and Sinfield missed four so not quite the ever-presents some might interpret that comment to convey.

He won't come close, that's the point. But neither would McClennan either IMO had he been here this year.

You're either being deliberately stupid or it's coming naturally to you today. Either way, it's not my responsibility to illuminate you and I've done a fair bit for charity this month already so I don't feel guilty leaving you in the dark.

You may be right. Lowes track record at Salford and Warrington might not have been his fault. You may be right. McDermott's record at harlequins may not be his fault. You may be right, the level of performances might be more to do with players than two proven failures at coach.

Then again, you may be wrong.

You have posted little to suggest you're anything but the latter.

But... everyone was busy telling us at the time how we needed to peak for the start of the season for that match. That has not been a priority this year so one could expect it to, in fact, have the inverse effect.

Buderus in the YEP is at least taking some responsibility, and seemingly focused entirely on improving the defence. I don't think McDermott will work out, but senior players need to stand up and be counted as well.

I think that is pretty obvious - it would be OK if everything remained the static - it doesn't. Other teams change personnel and develop existing players.

Huddersfield are a much better side this year than last, Leeds are possibly a poorer side to compare results from last year doesn't present a true guideline.

kylie leuluai isn't too old he's still playing great

He is 32/33 - hopefully this will be his final season, I doubt it though-sadly

Why? He is playing well. We need a guy like Leuluai in the pack! Who is going to put the big shots in and really get stuck into the opposition in defence? As it currently stands the only big hitter in our team is Kylie...With Burgess up'ing his game this season, Bailey looking a much better player and actually winning collisions and JP near a comeback I think Leeds have one of the best front rows in SL. 2 veterans and 2 players in early/mid 20s, perfect. Its the back row that isn't and won't complement them this season

Hardly comments that support your point of view.