Jump to content

MyMrsWouldPreferSinfield

Coach
  • Posts

    576
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by MyMrsWouldPreferSinfield

  1. I am really looking forward to this one. Saints are a long way short of a vintage team and might just swagger into the game with a level of overconfidence having just thumped Leeds three weeks ago.

    It feels like Leeds have spent most of the season playing with either a reserve back line or a reserve set of forwards but currently only a small number are out and have no excuses.

    Walmsley trampled all over the kids three weeks ago and as good as he is he will not be as effective against Oledzki, Tetevano and Mellor that were missing in that game.

    The weight of the Leeds shirt is the only pressure on Leeds as most expect them to be beaten just like they have been the last 8 or 10 times by Saints.

    Oddly, when it actually matters, Leeds have won the last 8 or 10 playoff/grand final matches against Saints.

    If Leeds can manage a high completion rate they will go very very close. It should be an absolute cracker!

  2. 15 hours ago, Old Frightful said:

    Had to check it wasn't Sir Kev then, sorry.

    Have to say I think you're incorrect for most of it.

    Sure, there was one or two niggles towards the end but I think the game had gone by then.

    We were in font at arf tarm, why would we introduce stuff that would drag us back downfield when our game tactics did that anyway?

    I get what you are saying OF and maybe we will just agree to disagree on this one - like old times!

    Obviously the elbow into Myler was picked up on TV not least because Myler jumped up and remonstrated to the referee. I am sure we all agree that it was a needless cheap shot that presumably he thought he would get away with by looking the other way. You are correct though this came later.

    I put that incident in the same 'needless' category as pushing a bloke into the advertising boards then immediately helping him up as if it was an accident or when an attacker is pinned to the floor using your forearm/elbow/palm of your hand to push face/head into the ground or even when trying to get a up for a PTB throwing your legs upwards with the intent to kick the defender but having the excuse of 'trying to wriggle free'.

    Hull did all of those things with deliberate intent from the start of the game but when do teams/players ever get punished for anything like that? Almost never and therefore Hull were not inviting pressure by way of penalties.

    As I said earlier, I like the rough part of the game, I love a strong tackle and I do not object to handbags but trying to rough a rse players as described is just cheap. Grub.

    Maybe I noticed it more than usual (all teams have moments) in Hull's game the other night and they are not as bad as they appeared but it did feel like they wanted to intimidate/rough up Leeds into submission in ways other than simply playing a physical game within the rules.

    I will watch on Monday with interest and will be cheering the codheads on.

  3. 18 minutes ago, JohnM said:

    Says a neutral observer. 😃😃😃😃😃

    Simply this: you are incorrect.

    Yes, Leeds were the better side with more drive, speed and purpose.  Hull were in panic mode, too many errors, too slow around the PTB.

    However, your accusation is just wrong.

    I am not trolling Hull fans I can assure you. Leeds won the game, this is not sour grapes.

    In my humble opinion Hull, from the off and at every opportunity, were dirty grubs which as a team I have never noticed from them before. This has nothing to do with the score, how well Leeds did or did not play but rather how Hull players wanted to inflict needless pain/damage to the Leeds players in behaviour outside of the rules. I am all for a hard game and to be honest do not mind handbags.

    The Myler elbow was the example that was highlighted on TV but there must have been two dozen tackles from Hull players using hands/forearms/elbows pushing usually heads into the ground and other things going unnoticed like pushing Handley into the advertising boards and pretending it was an accident or trying to kick your opponents when getting up from the tackle in the pretence of being held down etc..

    Maybe Hull let their emotion for the fixture overwhelm them on this occasion but it is not something I imagined.

  4. 18 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

    And yet Leeds should have had 2 in the bin for professional fouls 

    30 seconds earlier the referee ignored Prior's claims for a penalty and so he wrongly made a point by fouling/obstructing and argued to the ref that he can do it if the Hull player can.

    My point is not specifically decisions either way but rather tonight, Hull 1 to 17 were a team of grubs and I've never seen them that way.

    Every team in every game have moments but to my mind too much unnecessary spite all game and I even like the game a bit nasty.

    • Haha 1
  5. I do not usually stick my neck out but I think Leeds will slaughter Salford tonight by a big number.

    Assuming the 21 named are all available we have the strongest team we have had all year. It will be interesting to see if Agar selects McClelland but given the form of Leeming it would not be a shock to see him in the halves and Myler at FB.

    Salford are also selecting from a strong squad with blokes back but given they concede c30/40 or more the majority of the time, on a dry evening in Headingley and with the crowd back, I can see Leeds posting 50.

  6. On 11/05/2021 at 22:46, DimmestStar said:

    Wakefield to win and Agar sacked.

    If Wakefield do win the game I would say this will be a genuine consideration of the Leeds board.

    Leeds still have Walker, Newman, Lui, Tetevano, Myler & Smith missing from their best 17/19 but unlike earlier in the season they can now field a capable set of backs.

    If you include the two hookers; Briscoe, Hurrell, Handley, Gale, Sutcliffe, Leeming, Dwyer, Eastmond is not really chopped liver!

    Leeds have much more depth to their squad than Wakefield who are also down on numbers.

    I think Leeds will probably win with something to spare but if they don't Agar must expect to be asked to come up the office. Not many would survive 6 losses in a row.

  7. I think both teams were rusty to say the least. Gale was terrible by his standards, young Broadbent, for all his talent going forward will need to improve his defence. Given an almost entire reserve backline and the first game of the season I am quite happy to nick it.

    It would be unfair to say Wakefield were flattered by the score, the game is about taking chances.

    Leeds were dominant but not overwhelmingly and it could be argued that the small dominance we had in the game was down to the fact Wakefield repeatedly coughed up the ball or gifted set restarts rather than our great play.

    The right team won but it was a game from start to finish.

    • Like 1
  8. He is only here to add depth to the squad - why all the fuss.

    Leeds are not making a big song and dance about it like they have just signed the messiah.

    I do not believe this is a knock to McClelland either but rather accepting that they have just taken two long term injuries to FB & Half of which Eastmond can play both.

    I think it extremely unlikely he is on big money and expect McClelland to start the season higher in the pecking order.

    • Like 2
  9. 1 hour ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

    Yeah I mean they'll be strong enough to 'get by' but very unlikely to seriously challenge, without bringing in at least 1 decent player. It will be a shame if this turns into another 'burn' season for Leeds. 

    It could be a slow start for Leeds now, this will be hugely disruptive.

    One half out for a dozen games and will fairly come back slightly rusty.

    One half out for the entire pre season and will likely miss the start of the season.

    Fullback out for the entire season.

    Centre returning from horror injury, will not make the start of the season and has had no preseason.

    If Hurrell gets inured that is the full set!

    It will be interesting to see what Agar does, Myler is a total liability in defence but I suspect he will now be the first choice fullback rather than Sutcliffe.

    The only silver lining is starting McLelland at 6 might be the making of him, he is a natural standoff but it is sink or swim for him you would think. If he does get a genuine uninterrupted three months in the team he will either retain the shirt when Lui is back or he will drop back into the reserves and probably never make the grade at Leeds.

    I really like Lui as he is as consistent a player as we have but he is only moderate. McLelland will not need to be better than Danny McGuire to keep the shirt which at 21 going 22 you would think now is his chance.

    Frustrating really as the forwards have some depth this year which has not been the case for several years now.

    • Like 1
  10. 10 hours ago, Dave T said:

    It's interesting you paint the clubs as poor victims having to cut their cloths accordingly, but players as being greedy. It is clear which side you have come down on. 

    I expect all players are well aware there will be impacts, it doesn't mean that they should just accept whatever the clubs offer. 

    I find your post bizarre, particularly as you say without knowing the detail. 

    I'm painting no picture about the clubs.

    Cutting cloth comment related to every worker, RL or not, spending their means based on what they take home.

    Ie, earn less, spend less. Earn more spend more. Big earner, big mortgage. Pay cut; 2 up 2 down or 6 bed mansion, we may all find hardship when less comes in each month.

    My point was clear, it's not about the rich directors or the overwhelming majority of SL players, it's about the regular folk.

    Whilst they're not Premier League footballers they earn considerably more than average UK wages, much much more.

    This is not about underselling the comp as per how this thread has been totally hijacked for no relevant reason, this is about Covid19. The merit of that point belongs on a different thread. I agree FWIW, the comp is much better than the revenue it generated pre covid.

    I'll return to this thread in 9 months when my point will be much more obvious.

    The best solution for everyone is that ALL clubs survive, ALL employees take home sufficient money to make ends meet even if it means sacrifice and we ALL live to prosper another day.

    Player strikes risks the entire industry and not just the players, this is exactly why they dare threaten it in such an horrendous time. I'm sorry, it is just wrong.

    Are people not watching the news? Maybe everyone is home, enjoying the furlough money.

    In general I honestly feel for business owners. Not specifically SL but across the board. I nurtured a business for almost 16 years that went pop almost a decade ago with over 30 guys joing the dole queue, most of them with family and a mortgage.

    You take it home. As do most human beings. You can say what you want but I don't believe for a moment ANY club is trying to fleece any player, they're educated folk trying to survive.

    Cost cutting come from the top and unfortunately for the players it's there and not letting general workers go to facilitate players contracts and that is what it'll come to.

  11. 19 hours ago, nadera78 said:

    Interesting opinion for a fan of a sport that was literally created so that players could be paid a decent wage 

    None of us know the finer points of the strike action however it would be fair to assume no club is rubbing their hands together at the prospect of fleecing the players.

    The world is heading for a depression not a recession. The reality of a moderate pay reduction, in the context of average pro SL wages, still leaves the players extremely well positioned compared to the average man on the street. Put the violins away.

    Whilst no man wants to take a pay cut as typically we all cut our cloth accordingly, the stark reality of the world we're in should immediately remove any rational arguments they pitch.

    It is simply wrong to hold others to ransom for your own personal greed  especially when it could effect thousands of others and not just yourself.

    Yes they have a contract. How much will it be worth when they hold their hand out to the official receiver! Nothing.

    They are not being wronged or cheated, this is something we are all in together. Should these clubs let some admin staff, cleaners, ground staff etc go so these moaning idiots can get their contracted 'decent wage', get real.

    I'm sorry it's tripe. Try being an employer and responsible for keeping hundreds of people's families fed and you'll soon lose any sympathy for the top earners complaints.

  12. I hope any player that strikes is shown the door as quickly as possible and no club ever offers them another contract.

    Simply greedy and shortsighted. 

    If they strike they run the risk of taking clubs down, potentially SL.This is not about the wealthy directors or the players but the huge team of normal salaried people each club has as well as all the connected trades.

    They'll all need a second career so nevermind it is a short career, poor blokes etc they, like the rest of us have to, must get real with what is happening.

    If they don't like it, retire and get a normal job which will certainly pay much less than the temporarily reduced contract. Geez Wakefield cannot afford paint for the steps pre Covid, just wrong.

  13. Hall was standout when the corner flag was in touch.

    He built his reputation at that time as the ultimate finisher and typically smaller guys couldn't compare.

    The rules changed so he no longer stood out nor did Leeds employ the same tactics.

    Hall has never been a fast runner even in his prime, these days he looks distinctively slow amongst other backs around him.

    I do agree that his teammates don't use him that often as an attacking option, it's noticeable.

    I know he was always quite reliable at Leeds, you'd not be worried about his defence or the high kick etc although over the years he's coughed up a clanger or someone has picked his pocket.

    He is clearly very rusty though, he was at fault the other day, positioned wrong leading to a try. He's played 8 games in two years though, he needs a good run in the team before he will be seen at his best. 

     

×
×
  • Create New...