Joined: Sep 12 2010 Posts: 11412 Location: Behind the picket fence on the grassy knoll in Dealey Plaza, Dallas, Texas.
Him wrote:Has Falloon played at loose forward? Has he defended in that position? That would have meant moving JJB out of that defensive position and to the 2nd row.
However you bring Falloon on, it disrupts the team to some degree other than a straight swap for Burrow.
Yes I had no problem with it last night. Happened similar last year away to Cas although Burrow did get on for the last 5/6 mins when we made it a three score lead, Aiton was having that good a game he shouldn't have been taken off.
Looking at the stats none of the forwards did any silly Peacock-style huge numbers. In fact the tackles/carries from the forwards were very well shared out.
"The Golden Generation finally has its Golden Fleece! They have Wembley Cup Final winners medals to add to their collection."
Joined: Apr 03 2003 Posts: 28186 Location: A world of my own ...
Him wrote:Achurch frustrates me. He gives you glimpses of what he can do, the half break and offload to Keinhorst for instance, but that's all you get, a glimpse.
Frankly, the twice he ran in the opposite direction rather than tackle Pritchard should signal the end of his time in a Leeds shirt. I'd rather have a young kid on the field who is prepared to throw his body on the line rather than a shirker who runs away from getting involved.
Hopefully Moon will be back before long and Keinhorst can shift into the second row.
When Buderus was at Leeds, he used to start games at hooker then when Burrow came on shift to a loose-forward role defending in the middle unit. You could have done the same with Falloon last night, when Mullally was blowing out of his backside. Defending as a prop, "normal" hooker or loose-forward has very little difference, you're in the middle unit of the field.
I get the feeling either McDermott doesn't rate Falloon, or he's making a point to GH who we all know will have had final say on his signing. Given some of his cryptic comments in the media, are relationships off the field starting to fray at the seams?
"As you travel through life don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things" - George Carlin
Him wrote:Has Falloon played at loose forward? Has he defended in that position? That would have meant moving JJB out of that defensive position and to the 2nd row.
However you bring Falloon on, it disrupts the team to some degree other than a straight swap for Burrow.
I don't know if he has played LF, but he can certainly defend as a forward in the middle channel thus giving a.n.other a break. OR ...get this: if not trusted then don't bluddy select him (or any other) if you're not going to play him. Select somebody you will put on the field.
As Andy Gilder says, maybe McDermott is playing political games. Either way it is foolhardly and dangerous when the team is desperate for points and confidence.
Joined: Feb 25 2002 Posts: 619 Location: Bradford 6 ( Bandit country )
DHM wrote:
Leeds Thirteen wrote:He was on the pitch for the full 80 granted , Delaney probably contributed more in his 8 minutes though . Injury and a broken body is one thing , lack of desire and bottle is another .
As much as I think Achurch is a waste of space I can't agree with that. Delaney, even when on, died with the ball every carry (as usual at the moment) and was on the pitch for such a short time that it must now be clear he's far too big a gamble on the bench - especially if you are only going to use 3 subs anyway. Delaney has done some great things in a Leeds shirt, but all good things come to an end.
I am inclined to agree with you regarding Delaney and what he offers at the moment in terms of reliability / fitness . but I would still argue he offers way more in terms of desire and guts than Achurch ever will . Both players are probably not giving real value , but for vastly differing reasons .
" Nothings changed for all the deaths or their ideas created, its just the same fascistic games but the rules arent clearly stated nothings really different , all governments the same , they can call it freedom , but slavery is the game "
Joined: Sep 12 2010 Posts: 11412 Location: Behind the picket fence on the grassy knoll in Dealey Plaza, Dallas, Texas.
nantwichexile wrote:I don't know if he has played LF, but he can certainly defend as a forward in the middle channel thus giving a.n.other a break. OR ...get this: if not trusted then don't bluddy select him (or any other) if you're not going to play him. Select somebody you will put on the field.
As Andy Gilder says, maybe McDermott is playing political games. Either way it is foolhardly and dangerous when the team is desperate for points and confidence.
Understandable why he was on the bench to potentially come on, but how often has Burrow played that well that he should be left on at dummy half all game? The performance of Burrow dictated that Falloon shouldn't come on for him. If Burrow had one of his poorer/average games and Falloon was left unused then fair enough.
"The Golden Generation finally has its Golden Fleece! They have Wembley Cup Final winners medals to add to their collection."
Joined: Aug 09 2008 Posts: 4934 Location: Living the Dream
nantwichexile wrote:I'm sorry but not using all your 17 players out of choice, in a 17 man game is just plain barmy amd inexcusable. In last night's game there was no requirement to sub Burrow, but the interchanges would allow Faloon to give another forward a break if only filling in at LF for a short period. How many games have been lost with forwards too shagged to make a critical tackle (recently Cuthbertson on Mulhern)? It's especially foolhardy when selecting Delaney who is permanently on one leg and managed 8 minutes last night. Don't let the (just) win cloud your collective judgement.
No it isn't a 17 man game. It is a 13 aside game with a subs bench of 4 substitutes should you require them. They have reduced the number of interchanges thank goodness and I would favour a further reduction. The way the game has gone where you have muscle bound forwards only capable of 15 minute stints is one of the reasons for the decline in our game.
This fallacy that you have to use all your subs in a pre match planned manner no matter how the game pans out is what is barmy ! Falloon was cover for the hooker position and as Burrow was having a good game and is an 80 minute player there was no need to use him certainly not in place of a big forward.
Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you! - Winston Churchill
Andy Gilder wrote:Frankly, the twice he ran in the opposite direction rather than tackle Pritchard should signal the end of his time in a Leeds shirt. I'd rather have a young kid on the field who is prepared to throw his body on the line rather than a shirker who runs away from getting involved.
Hopefully Moon will be back before long and Keinhorst can shift into the second row.
When Buderus was at Leeds, he used to start games at hooker then when Burrow came on shift to a loose-forward role defending in the middle unit. You could have done the same with Falloon last night, when Mullally was blowing out of his backside. Defending as a prop, "normal" hooker or loose-forward has very little difference, you're in the middle unit of the field.
I get the feeling either McDermott doesn't rate Falloon, or he's making a point to GH who we all know will have had final say on his signing. Given some of his cryptic comments in the media, are relationships off the field starting to fray at the seams?
There may be a difference in quality between Buderus and Falloon Former Aus captain and current Blues captain looking for a new challenge vs. player looking to get career back on track... Buderus was a brilliant defender, not just in the amount of work but the ability to read play, something I havnt seen from Falloon If Burrow is playing well then put him on Keinhorsts side in defence and put Baldwinson on the bench
Joined: Apr 03 2003 Posts: 28186 Location: A world of my own ...
If the choice is between leaving a clearly fatigued player on when the opposition are moving the ball around chasing the game or getting a fresh set of legs on even if it's just to add some line speed and mobility in defence, I know which one I'd be taking.
"As you travel through life don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things" - George Carlin
nantwichexile wrote:I'm sorry but not using all your 17 players out of choice, in a 17 man game is just plain barmy amd inexcusable. In last night's game there was no requirement to sub Burrow, but the interchanges would allow Faloon to give another forward a break if only filling in at LF for a short period. How many games have been lost with forwards too shagged to make a critical tackle (recently Cuthbertson on Mulhern)? It's especially foolhardy when selecting Delaney who is permanently on one leg and managed 8 minutes last night. Don't let the (just) win cloud your collective judgement.
Yeah, heaven forbid the monotonous bitching about the coach should suffer some sort of interruption...
The restriction on subs is obviously deliberate - and part and parcel of what forges this team into a lean, mean big game team. You know - the type of team that regularly serves up the doubters a giant slab of humble pie.
"He's the best coach I've had... His mix of man-management and his game plan is second to none. Since Brian Mac has been in charge, we've been in every final so far. I love playing for him. I can't praise him enough, I've so much respect for him and I hope he's here for a very long time." Kevin Sinfield 29/9/12
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
