Actually what Nantwich suggested was that McDermott was deliberately making sure that Sutcliffe doesn't impress too much by telling him to hold back in games thus he'd have an easier time recalling a 6-time GF winning captain and record points scorer to the team.

McShane is dual-reg with Hunslet this weekend. Puzzling.

Why when we can have Kev & Rob interchanging at 9?

Seriously though, I'd prefer Sutcliffe & Rob in the 7s and Kev at hooker.

Oh and before I'm called a McDermott lover I too think it's a bad call to drop McShane.

Hmm - It's the right call in my opinion.

He's been average to dire pretty much all season - again, IMO.

He either passes to first receiver, runs and knocks on or attempts that little scoot over from dummy half on the last tackle which rarely works against the decent teams.

He's had a couple of games where I've thought, "OK, he's pushing on" and some of his kicking has been good. But for a starting number 9 these games are increasingly few and far between and sadly he's rarely backed them up.

The sharper distribution and better DH running was there for all to see when Mcshane started more games at 9 when RB reverted back to 7.
He had a stinker last week and to be fair the Coach is well within his right to drop/bench him this week if only he had the nadgers and consistency to enforce that policy squad wide!

It would be perfectly understandable had he brought an hooker in also. We have been playing all season with McShane at least on the bench to come on at hooker. Thereby even allowing for him being dropped you would expect at the least Burrow to hooker and an interchange hooker.

Having so many backs, and nobody specialist in a key position is a wrong decision.

Well its one thing to drop him from the starting line-up but from the whole 19 is pretty harsh.

However its just further evidence that the McDermott/McShane relationship isn't and hasn't been good. Like others have said this year and last, some players get away with bad games. My guess would be based on McDermott's high regard for a player's attitude and what he's like off the field as a person is that something about McShane doesn't tick those boxes (as well as maybe some on field attributes too).

I guess McDermott sees Burrow as a specialist hooker capable of the full 80. Wrong IMO, but I can see that as his view

So Minns and Duckworth to miss out.

It's a credibility issue.

Nantwich does himself no favours.

It's far from ideal when a SL club sends their No9 to a championship club

It also confirms to me that Liam Hood had has been released I was told that the coach has only spoken to him a handful of times since December and then only to say 'morning' no wonder he hasnt progressed as you would expect strange coaching technique if you ask me

No idea if Liam Hood has been released or not but there's usually a price to be paid for decking a player who ranks higher up on the club seniority list.

Regards,
N. Scruton.

How is his form for Hunslet?

If he isn't standing out at Championship level then i guess it stands to reason why he hasn't recieved a call up yet.I dont watch Hunslet but i know he has started alot of games this year and has had ample chance to prove a point to the Leeds coaching team,if the lad is performing to a good level each week and doing this then as you say its a strange one.

I tend to agree.

McShane has had enough game time to prove his worth which IMO is nothing more than average. He has done some good work without ever claiming the position as his own. His defence is suspect, he is a bit greedy, he drops out of parts of the game (even when he is on the field) and in recent games with many youngsters in the side when we have needed players to step up to the mark he has been disappointing. He doesn't look sharp or fit to me and I wonder how well he trains. He may be a 'proper hooker' but not good enough as first choice so far.

Sending him to Hunslet maybe the kick up the backside he needs, so it will be interesting to see how he reacts.

I think Sinny will drop into the hooking role for a spell, just to give Burrow the freedom he needs to do his stuff.

If BMcD keeps Wee Rob out as an 80 minute hooker, he'll need his bumps feeling.

From the article on the Leeds site it seems like Duckworth will be playing which I think would leave Minns and Keinhorst missing out. A close call between Keinhorst and Foster as both can cover in the forwards and backs. Not seen a lot of the recent games so going on what I've read on here Foster seems to be impressing more.

imo mcshane is not good enough to be our starting hooker,i would release him without a doubt and target a quality hooker from outside of our club if one was available of the quality of lunt or clark
failing that i would even move sinny to hooker as i believe this could be his next positional move and one that would also enable the transition of sutcliffe to starting 6 and ward to starting 13

Unfortunately for Mcshane he does not fit in the mould of the modern hooker, or at least the super league hooker. His distribution and skill is very high, but athletic ability some what lacking. Unless you can do 30+ tackles and 10-15 high yardage scoots see Roby, Clarke, higham mcclorum etr your deemed not good enough. Hope Mcshane moves on as I believe he is a fine player just 20 years out of date.

Why are we talking about Wakefield v Leeds in the Leeds v Wakefield thread?

Poor by McDermott and I believe McShane will look to move this winter now. McShane is the best hooker at the club but continues to get dropped when players return from injury. I like McShane he is a very clever player, with a full range of skills and gets the players going forwards, just a shame the coach has never showed any confidence in him.

I also hear Hardaker is playing centre this week too.

Sadly he is not the only one JJB and Kirke have both been very average to abysmal at times but neither have been treated like McShane? He was awful on Friday so McDermott has a point - things have to be seen to be equitable or else people will lose respect for the manager's judgement.

Would agree re: foster in the pack, thats his position vice versa at for Keinhorst, much better than foster there. Odd to drop Keinhorst from the team, when he has been kept in the pack, now with a spot at he goes back to Hunslet.....

Agree with all of that.