Only saw the second half, but looked in good nick. It looks like a completely new team compared to 2 months ago.

The much maligned front row are doing enough for us to win games and compete in others. I think a top class 9 and left centre are needed for next season to start beating the top 4 teams……..

Forwards decide if you win games, backs decide by how many. We need to focus on our pack and in particular our front row before we even think about anything else. I think left centre is probably 4th or 5th on the list of needs we have

Although he hasn't seen first team yet there seems to be a lot of faith in Edwards as a centre? Plus Simpson will be a year older. That's on top of Hardaker presumably being first choice if everyone is fit (and he stays).

And with the upsurge in form of Sutcliffe it will be interesting to see where Hardaker fits in.
I personally prefer Myler at FB and Newman takes one of the centre spots.
You then have Hardaker, Sutcliffe, Simpson and Edwards for the other centre birth.
The backs for me do not need strengthening but we do need two go forward props and depending on what happens to Prior/Tetavano that number could increase to 4.

I was looking at the options if Sutcliffe goes.

even with the ones listed and less Sutcliffe centre is one of the last positions I'd look at. In fact backs as a whole look OK, particularly if Sinfield Jr kicks on and Johnson can fill in there. We've a lot of backrowers and three hookers with O'Connor.

Not perfection anywhere but props are ridiculously weak by comparison to everywhere else.

I'm not persuaded by O'Connor at hooker at yet and fear if Leeming broke his leg in the 1st round of next season we could be in some trouble. Despite all the talk of Johnson, he has barely played at hooker in the first team and has yet to prove he will be good enough. Hooker therefore is of slight concern to me.

I could be be wrong though and either or both of O'Connor and Johnson could become good hookers in the future.

Interesting bit in thid article . “Why I’m saying that is because he has only got what he’s got left on his contract, so when you get your board up and look at ones that are on over £160,ooo who aren’t playing well, they are staying because you can’t get rid” Is this aimed at Tetanvo £160k not playing well? https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/leeds-rh ... als-55927/

Interesting bit in thid article . “Why I’m saying that is because he has only got what he’s got left on his contract, so when you get your board up and look at ones that are on over £160,ooo who aren’t playing well, they are staying because you can’t get rid” Is this aimed at Tetanvo £160k not playing well? https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/leeds-rh ... als-55927/

rollin thunder wrote:Interesting bit in thid article . “Why I’m saying that is because he has only got what he’s got left on his contract, so when you get your board up and look at ones that are on over £160,ooo who aren’t playing well, they are staying because you can’t get rid” Is this aimed at Tetanvo £160k not playing well? https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/leeds-rh ... als-55927/ It’s an SARL, so it’s not even worth the data usage.

rollin thunder wrote:Interesting bit in thid article . “Why I’m saying that is because he has only got what he’s got left on his contract, so when you get your board up and look at ones that are on over £160,ooo who aren’t playing well, they are staying because you can’t get rid” Is this aimed at Tetanvo £160k not playing well? https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/leeds-rh ... als-55927/ It’s an SARL, so it’s not even worth the data usage.

I'll wait til appears on 'Leeds Live'...