I'm not saying that is what's happening. My only point is that I'd rather the books balanced and the new stand doesn't over-stretch the club. If there's enough in the coffers to do that and spend the full cap, then that's grand.



I don't think the club have intimated that anyway.

I don't imagine the club will directly say anything of the likes, but their intention will be clear as day with the first team squad they serve up.

The good coin made from supporters in recent years has gone to invest in the stadium and pay off the debts of the past. Whilst Leeds are in good financial health and are probably the best off RL club in the Northern hemisphere in terms of finances, there isn't a bottomless pit to just find money from.



I agree with El Diablo, if the new stand does affect the first team squad then that's the price we pay for having a financially stable club. However, I highly doubt we will be spending any less on the first team squad in the next few years than we have in the last few years.

What we're basically saying is that the new SS NEEDED doing, no choice. H&S and all that.



That needs paying for somehow, and singing Richard Moore instead of Paul Gallen (a.n.other "superstar"icon_wink.gif is one of the ways of doing that.

A lack of investment in the playing squad will surely impact on the finances of the club going forward.



Austerity Leeds (on the field) will be an interesting experiment. I actually prefer having plenty of space around me while stood on the terraces. It'll be nice to get back to those days.

No, no, you've got that wrong. We're still going to win things without getting any better/younger players, and keep all the fans too, and GH will have some change left to get a yacht.



He's got it all figured out. Just keep your rational thoughts and concerns to yourself please.

I thought all we had to do was get rid of the coach RR?



Don't tell me you're finally accepting that the playing squad simply isn't good enough to win things?

This year, the playing squad IS good enough to win things, had they been coached better. Perhaps next year too, so yes, JUST getting rid of the coach would give us a better shout of challenging next year.



Just getting rid of the coach clearly isn't enough for the longer term. But I never suggested it was. And you know that.

On the subject of the club making good coin, every penny I've ever handed over to the club was in exchange for goods or services (e.g. watching a game of RL or a piece of merchandise) and I received exactly that good or service in return. SO I don't feel like the club particularly owes me anything. Or vice versa. We're all square as far as I'm concerned.



I do agree with tvoc though, disinvestment in the squad would lead to a drop in income, which wouldn't be good for business. I'm sure if we can work that out then Mr Hethrington will have thought of it too.

Despite those players being another year further into their decline and another year closer to retirement?



Now who's being a believist?

The coach is a good starting point for the future. He seems to use trial and error or a dice game to decide tactics/selection. This group of players given a decent game plan will compete with any side in the league

Er, Yes, despite that. I'm not saying they won't be another year further into decline, or closer to retirement?! Where did I say that?! Nor did I say they'd win the league convincingly and it would all be rosy.



I'm saying "With a better coach, but no new players we would compete more than we have this year". Are you struggling to read my writing or something!? What part of that isn't true?!



The other scenario is to have another year further into their decline and another year closer to retirement players, with the same sh[ii[/it coach.

The debts were paid off via the sale of the cricket ground!!



The monies are not a bottomless pit especially as the shortfall on the RU has to be made up from somewhere. I can live with a lesser squad provided the board are up front and honest about the situation and they use this as an opportunity to blood some youngsters not an opportunity for any more very average UK/Overseas journeymen such as Richard Moore.

I'm with you on that.

How about we start with "all of it", given it's an opinion you're attempting to present as fact?



I can't see how you've reached it in all seriousness, given a number of the playing squad are already well past their best and not going to get any better, but that doesn't stop you being perfectly entitled to think that if you want.

Your improvement scenario only works if the coach is the problem - that is your opinion not fact. This side is 6th in the table someway a drift of the best teams in the comp. Given they have strengthen or have improving youngsters and we have an ageing weaker squad how are we going to bridge that gap? Bring Wayne Bennett in - you could bring Clark Kent in and you would not bridge that void in quality.

Ok... In my opinion a better coach could get more out of (admittedly ageing, and past their best) players. They're still (however much their ageing and past their best) better than what McDermott appears to be getting out of them.



The coach isn't the ONLY problem but, in my opinion, changing him (for somebody better) would improve the squad.



These (again, ageing, past their best, closer to retirement, blah blah blah) players are unquestionably better than what the team has produced this year.

What evidence have you got to suggest this is the case - to me this is what they produced last year, without McGuire they would have struggled to make the play offs. It is only because of the overall dire standard of the league this season that the team has finished as high up the table as they have.



Until several players are replaced this year will be seen as good season in comparison regardless of who coaches them.

Isn't that the exact point?!



I mean, basically, it's a 5 or 6 team competition. Of which we're sitting 6th of. In other words, we were always going to finish at least 6th, regardless of both players and coach.



For me, that completely rules out using league position as a measure of success.



Overall performance, tactics, game plans, squad selection, motivation, consistency, have all been dire this year, and it has been horrific to watch. That is what I'm judging McDermott on, not the fact that he's managed to scrape 5th/6th in a league full of whipping boys and to get to a cup final without having to play anything like a decent team in the process.



You think as you like.

Your point is the team is much better than it shows - last year they were coached by a double GF winning coach, this year a different coach poorer in your view but no change in standards - there is only one constant!!



Performances are about players playing to their own potential - by your measure this isn't happening. It didn't happen last year either so why is it down to the coach, could be the players are simply not good enough to execute simple gameplans? Last year's CC final had nothing to do with the coaching and everything to do with the ineptitude of the players on the field.



I still struggle to see how with a change of coach this squad will be able to challenge the likes of Wigan, Warrington and Saints over the course of a season? To do that you need to replace: Webb, Kylie, Kirke, Bailey, Peacock, Delanney, Smith with better players.

Just out of interest... Have you heard of the salary cap?



The likes of Kirke, Bailey, Delaney etc are keeping us under the salary cap. It's not just a case of going out and buying a better player is it!? "Better" players tend to want more money. It's not just about buying the best players. It's about successfully managing the players you've got, and getting the best out of them. THAT IS THE COACH'S JOB!

How many times have we read on here... "Cross is sh[ii[/it!". He looked pretty good at Wigan to me.



Likewise Burgess. "He'll be in the Bunnies reserves." Seems to be holding his own with the big boys from where I'm sitting.



Any chance that's because they're being properly coached?



Ian Kirke is 6' 5" tall and 17 and a half stone. That is something that you cannot teach. Being a prop forward is something that you CAN teach. You do not need natural God given ability to be a Rugby League Prop Forward. That particular position, especially the "hard yard" type of prop over an "offloader", can be entirely coached into somebody if a) they're willing to learn and b) they have the right coach/mentor.



Delaney is fearless, and pretty fast for someone of his size. That again, is something that you cannot coach. We should be channelling his fearlessness & speed into making him a better player. Not just getting the chequebook out and signing somebody else.



The squad needs improving. I'm not saying it doesn't. We need to trim the deadwood, get rid of the past their best players, and develop the rest. Delaney/Kirke etc may not be the best players in the world, but they're certainly not "passed their best".



They need PROPERLY coaching. By a proper coach. Not just replacing, because I guarantee, under a poor coach, whoever the replacement is will turn out "sh[ii[/it" as well.

The only thing that I can think of as to why we are not making any announcements is that the players we are getting are under-contract for next season and if thats the case, nothing can be announced till after 1st Sept.

Does that also apply to players from the NRL? I'm thinking of the Buderus player exchange.

I disagree on 3 counts.



1) Cross was poor for Wigan. About as poor as he was for us.



2) John Lang must be some coach to have turned Burgess into a good NRL prop in a matter of weeks. Either that or it's not coaching that was the issue with Burgess.



3) You cannot learn to have fire in your belly. Kirke has always lacked that. Give me a 5'10" wrecking ball over someone like Kirke any day.