Quote rhinoms="rhinoms"That's pretty pointless when you could put a hell of a lot more team line-ups in games we've won with Mcguire and Burrow at 6+7 respectively and Sinfield in his best poisitionat 13 not least October games from 07/08/09!!'"
He said "sinfield isnt and never will be a stand off" which was nonsense. I haven't commented on whether him or McGuire/Burrow are preferred options.
FWIW I fully understand the idea of not playing McGuire and Burrow together as they are not in any way a conventional halfback pairing and are and always have been reliant on Sinfield to do a fair chunk of the hard creative work that other teams rely on their halfbacks for. Therefore there is a tactical integrity to Sinfield starting at 6 since he is doing a lot of the functions of the role, plus it opens up an additional grunt space on the bench as we don't have to carry the second hooker. All of which presupposes that he stays there for the entire game and completely abandons his normal role when starting in the 13 position, which he doesn't.
Personally I would have signed a proper creative halfback many years ago but the club became wed to the idea of McGuire+Burrow and, with Sinfield's presence, it seemed to work. But to try and pretend McDermott is some sort of crazed nutter for deciding Sinfield+1 is a more promising option is, in my opinion, delusional, and seems to fail to understand exactly what it is he does.
