: Sat Apr 25, 2009 7:24 pm  

Kifaru wrote:

Quins are better at slowing the game down than Leeds.

Actually I think the difference is in that we aren't fighting enough to get a quick PTB rather than Quins being better defensively.

In the end the forwards arent running the ball in hard enough or quick enough at the moment and so very rarely make a dent in the line for the likes of Webb, Burrow etc to take advantage of. And we aren't working enough to get a quick PTB.

: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:02 pm  

As with Salford, Quins were enthusiastic, they played simple rugby league and didn't make too many errors.

In contrast, Leeds:

Had no kicking game (or game plan at all for that matter).

Didn't offload.

Didn't back up.

Didn't defend well.

Played dull, ineffective one man rugby.

Seemed like they couldn't be ar5ed.

Looked absolutely knackered.

: Sun Apr 26, 2009 2:10 am  

Mr Scruff wrote:

As with Salford, Quins were enthusiastic, they played simple rugby league and didn't make too many errors.

In contrast, Leeds:

Had no kicking game (or game plan at all for that matter).

Didn't offload.

Didn't back up.

Didn't defend well.

Played dull, ineffective one man rugby.

Seemed like they couldn't be ar5ed.

Looked absolutely knackered.

So you agree Leeds were dominated around the ruck then.

: Sun Apr 26, 2009 1:53 pm  

Kifaru wrote:

So you agree Leeds were dominated around the ruck then.

i would suggest they were dominated in every aspect of the game

: Sun Apr 26, 2009 2:25 pm  

tad rhino wrote:

i would suggest they were dominated in every aspect of the game

Absolutely - a shift around/freshen up required