redjonn

or maybe it was a light hearted joke... and he over reacted... who knows.... Seems to me from other comments in this thread that because they have a bias against Myler that its all his fault, wereas super hero Burgess can't be at fault... That's my reading of comment on here, Anyway Warrington made a mistake and I am surprised that the opposition or whomever can override whatever rules...

chuckle... just my frustration... plus I've stopped watching.... hope I don't miss the super comeback...

that was a frustrating game to watch 2nd half... Catalans come out poor and continue giving easy penalties or 6 again making it easier for Wigan. Wigan so much the better team 2nd half after what despite the penalties first half from Catalan I thought would be a real arm tussle 2nd half. well done to wigan... mmmm not much to say about Catalan.

I would agree with the last sentence... plus to add for a reasonable size business getting approval for sponsorship or hospitality for a number of people.

Moving the cup to another date, even to end of season, is a tactical implementation not strategic. A strategic consideration would be to first decide what you see the CC as. Is it as now but with certain goals, like say its a celebration of RL history with goals to achieve recognition of the CC final as a top 5 or 3 or whatever sporting event, increase existing fan engagement, increase sponsorship income, etc etc etc. Then of course take tactical Implementations/decisions on how to achieve. Like putting in programmes to enhance CC final event aspects, put in a focus to attract increased attendance from all clubs/RL communities with whatever incentives one may adopt - free/discount coaches for groups, rail vouchers, free tickets to other events in London, etc etc... An alternative strategy may be to us the CC as a means to attract new people to watch the sport & increase awareness of the sport across other parts of the country. Thus you may play certain games in other parts of the country with a major advertisement/marketing blitz as well as magic type weekends. The goal to use CC as a means of attracting new sponsors or to increase value to existing sponsors... etc... The point being the focus is different leading to different decisions and implementations/actions. I just note the above two to try and differ between a tactical and strategic approach. One you are just tinkering the another is a change of focus/ambition. I am not saying the above are good idea;s just highlighting and trying all-be-it not very well to illustrate a strategic change of approach.

I would suspect that most of those being noisy are those that questioned the appointment from the beginning before he arrived. That noise influencing others now. I guess my question to them would be: Is the coach responsible for the good half's of exciting attacking play and excellent defence - I assume so. is the coach responsible for the drop off and poor half's of performance in the games - I assume so. In other words its a mixed bag, plaudits for the good displays surely, shake of the head for the rubbish parts. Leeds are 2 points behind the teams currently getting the plaudits, and on same number as Huddersfield another getting strong endorsements and one they dominated in the first half other week - they of course dropped off with the injuries on the edge which Hudds exploited. A game which to me showed lack of leadership on the pitch. Yep, the performances have not been for a full 80 minutes. Although the only game I think they were well beaten over 80mins was the Warrington game, a team that did similar to Saints subsequently. So as I say to-date a mixed bag, which many anticipated with a new spine. Personally I wasn't expecting Leeds to be challenging top 4 this year but they would make the play-offs. So whilst no big fan I would be more patient given the above with an expectation we will get some 80 mins of good performance soon.

don't know... all I know is I enjoy watching RL here including SL... over the years I've seen many poor games and many good games... even the poor one's don't put me off watching ... As with most sports some countries provide better standard than others but each still has many enjoying whatever level it is.

the young kids will learn from this... hear that a lot especially when teams are struggling, like Hull and Leeds, etc... I would agree they gain experience but not sure what they learn playing in poor teams struggling and lacking in confidence. The young players will have been playing RL for a long time, all-be-it in the academy, reserves or elsewhere. Not sure what else they learn other than playing at a more demanding pace and gaining experience so they are more confident when playing again at the higher level. Coming on for short periods in winning teams for sure helps the youngsters gain the experience and learn the structures and play books... not so sure about the struggling teams as they may be learning the wrong lessons... Means must though....

I tend to agree. Those who say the coach should go if they lose have already made their minds up. That is in their mind he should be sacked as you surely can not decide on a game if you lose. In other words they have decided and no matter what happens he should go, they will say the same at a later juncture if they win. As I have said before, what would the decision viewpoint have been at half time in the last game or with 18 mins to go. I'm sure the voices would not have been so loud for his sacking... yet following those 18 minutes he should go. Personally my decision is made that he should go, irrespective of the following games. I don't think that will be the case as I think Gary H will give him more time... to add I hope hes right and Smith proves me wrong.

yep, think that myself sometimes...chuckle question to ask was the same people saying lets sack the coach at half-time when Leeds were clearly on top. or even at 12points up with 18mins left on the clock and they were attacking in the Hudd's last 20. Although I must admit at screaming for a drop goal on the last play at that point... not sure about the decision making... Anyway the lack of someone to take control of the group with some tactical field kicking to slow the game down when Leeds clearly had big defensive weakness on the right edge. Someone to put in kicks to the sideline for example...

well yes, but my observations are that he does regular have brain farts. They normally follow a mistake that he makes, no problem that a mistake gets made though his immediate response seems to be a mental implosion. He rushes the next play he is involved in... The farcical drop out being an example, even worse that the rest of the team were not expecting a short drop out even if he didn't fluff it. In an earlier game he kicked out on the full immediate after his mistake led to a try... similar in another game were he rushed PTB after a mistake. me thinks he needs more resilience. Anyway I don't think he's a good full back anyway so I may be bias. Yep he catches high kicks no problem but he mostly flatters to deceive with his jiggling about and rarely joins the line in attack. At the moment Leeds need a solid defensive full back and organiser that also knows when to join the line and add the extra passing abilities rather than running in and out and somewhere about - disrupting the attack structure.

Warrington deserved the win. Thought Saints made too many errors and some ill discipline at key moments for which Warrington made the most of. Thought two key decisions/errors didn't help Saints as they managed to gain momentum and look dangerous. One was taking the two points and all be it watching on TV I thought Warrington were going through a ragged lose of energy patch, the second being Lomax mistake again with Saints in the ascendancy. From their on in Wire took over and never looked like losing the ascendancy. To read some comments you would think the game wasn't in the balance and that Saints never had any ascendancy at all. For sure after 60mins Saints imploded whilst Warrington showed how dangerous they can be with their attacking prowess. The last 20 minutes certainly most unlike Saints in they lost all composure or nous, I guess Warringtons tackle pressure taking its toll.

Dwyer will certainiy up the momentum when he comes on and especially as the opposition have lost some energy. Not seen Ipape much live so can't answer your question but having Dwyer off the bench will certainly be a positive. Oh and yep his defence is fine plus if you have off loaders he was always anticipating in position ready for such. I think he will provide good cover and if both fit he is a good signing. In my opinion Leeds could do with still having him as Ackers and his cover O'connor don't have that same spark to change momentum.. I'm guessing Ackers may have it but hasn't shown that additional element much yet...

He played well at times at Leeds, not much different than when I saw him play at Leigh recently... He can be very spontaneous catching the opposition out, the only down side being that this also catches his team mates out too... his team mates have to be very switched on as in highly focused and agile to capitalise on his sudden explosive runs from...

yep, this is his team as of this year with 7 games gone, a 4 to 3 record and just 2 points off the chasing pack to top of table. They beat Catalan, the only team to do so this season, ran Saints close and maybe could have won the first of the two games. They were poor against Warrington and Saints 2nd game and have had patches of brilliance and awfulness in the other games. They have been inconsistent this season for sure as one would have expected with new spine, so yep I would give more time.