top post mate

It probably wouldn't have affected the result. It might well have affected it, however. Playing a player in the position they play when we're short in that position is not throwing them to the dogs, it's using your squad sensibly.



As I've said before, I really don't care about the personnel, I just want what's best for the team.



In which case, it's quite a sad case of affairs that no-one else was able to give 15-20 minutes to help spell the obviously tired forwards.

Pre-submit edit: and what Chris28 says above.

Playing a player who has just struggled against one of the bottom placed sides in the competition, in an already depleted squad against one of the top teams in the competition is not using your squad sensibly.

Yes, it is. That's what the squad is for. We have these players in the squad to cover when cover is needed, as it sorely was yesterday.

The purpose of the squad is to expose youngsters who are not ready for it to a battering?

We'd still have lost, possibly by a bigger margin, and a young player would have had his confidence shot. Yes, that's definitely a better option.

the need to add unplanned for substitutions (e.g. Long retiring hurt and Radford's earlier rotation because of a hit to the head) meant that the number of rotations was greatly reduced. Lyne would have added nothing had he been intorduced under these circumstances. I believe he would have played if we had got through the match on the normal (planned) rotations.

It's questionable why Long started to be honest, at one point I commented to the guy behnd me that we'd be switching to unlimited interchanges the rate we were getting through them!

Again, I agree with the general point, but why put such players in the squad if they aren't ready?

Edit - and I don't mean the 17/19 man squad.

agar is doing a good job so far for us yes we have lost four games so what

think the leeds coach is in more trouble then what we are in

Match day experience ? Training with better players ? Helping there development ?

To get full time training

Don't need to be in the squad for that



They don't do that during the week? Are the under 20's kept completely separate from the first team??



Maybe, but when are they going to develop if they don't get to play because they aren't "good" enough?

Fair enough with the first point.

As far as I'm aware they train with the first team, full time, the U20s only train part time.

It's not about been good enough, it's that the aren't ready yet. Training with more physical players will only help them be ready for Super League faster.

Done all I asked for this week, beat Rovers and put in two good displays, playing much better rugby also.

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

The purpose of the squad is to use the players within it. We had both first choice wingers (or 'wingers' in Briscoe's case) out. We had a winger in the first team squad who was fit and available. Yet we moved four other players out of position to avoid playing a winger on the wing. And left ourselves a man short. That's poor use of the squad. If Lyne isn't capable of standing in on the wing for a game when he's needed, he shouldn't have a contract and be a member of the first team squad.



Pure supposition. And it doesn't make the decision any less wrong.