You do realise the Opta 'Try Assist' stat is deeply flawed don't you?

I notice you haven't deemed Leeds' defensive alignment over several seasons worthy of further analysis. That's a relief then.

So you claim to be "bored" of me, yet ask me to compare more stats. Oh, the irony.



As for a Ryvin Halfield comparison, we could do that, but why? The whole issue was that it was claimed Pat Richards (and various other Wigan players) were "less valuable" absentees than Danny McGuire is for Leeds (although then it got thrown in about adding Jamie Peacock as well). I disproved that, but I've no intention of comparing Pat Richards vs. every other Super League player, which is the route we're starting to take.

How do you get 11.8? Is that based on last season?

Here's the thing, approximately ONE of your fans has managed to make decent points and ask decent questions without resorting to childish insults and/or gutter language.

Said poster said this:





It's called "Ask a question, answer a question".



That it may be, but I don't have anything better to use unless I collect my own stats.



Why should I? No-one's asked, and I don't see what bearing it has on this discussion.

Anyone who superimposes a bad hair day, pouty mouthed photo of themselves onto Arnie's body, has enough issues with reality without you nasty boys picking on him!

There will be no cake if it continues!

You obviously thought it had a bearing when you (=#FF0000nobody else just you) posted this:



The failure to acknowledge your point was both flawed and inaccurate, I'm sure, will have been noted.

Technically, I didn't ask you to compare anything as the answer I asked for I put myself in the same post. But I understand why you wouldn't get that. Also, I didn't say you were boring, I just asked to be woken once you'd left. Not because you bore me, but because I have no desire whatsoever to be involved in this conversation, and I'm wishing I hadn't bothered joining in!



Top Tip; if you're using " " you should really quote something I've actually said. You've put "bored" as if you're quoting me, but I never used the word "bored". HTH


The 11.8 is based on 5 seasons (as your comparisons were).

I can show my working if it makes you feel better...

Ryan Hall Try Stats
Year; Played; Points; Points per match
2007; 9; 12; 1.3333
2008; 12; 32; 2.6666
2009; 29; 124; 4.2759
2010; 25; 92; 3.68
2011; 8; 24; 3
[iTotals; 83; 284; 3.4217 points per match[/i

Kevin Sinfield GK Stats
Year; Played; Points; Points per match
2007; 27; 226; 8.3704
2008; 26; 224; 8.6154
2009; 27; 232; 8.5926
2010; 21; 168; 8
2011; 8; 64; 8
[iTotals; 109; 914; 8.3853 points per match[/i

3.4217 + 8.3853 = 11.807.


As for why... well comparing two (of our 7) absentees to yours is just as pointless given that you can't possibly know what impact they would've had emotionally, or in the unmeasurable things. Perhaps, for example, Peacock's solitary offload could've lead to a try. Who's to say. Given that we're comparing ridiculous and pointless stats, I thought that one would be an interesting one. Technically, you should've combined the stats of Smith, Delaney, McGuire, Peacock, Lauitiiti, Jones-Bishop & Hardaker. But again, I understand why you didn't.

I spotted several mistakes in this off-topic post. Did you?



It's been something I've noticed many times with McGuire, he IS often out on the wing in defence. Someone did say that now he slots into the centre position instead, maybe he's changed to that now, I'll look out for it when he's back.

Back in his high-strikerate days, he was often out on the wing in attack too... having been in the correct position at first, bringing the centre-wing combination in to drag the defence infield, and then having the overlap outside the winger, or being in a position of backup should the centre/wing penetrate the defence themselves.

Simple but effective play.

No he isn't.


He's been defending there for years.


No he wasn't.

The difference between the knowledge you assume you have and the knowledge you actually have is astounding.

No he =#FF0000ISn't.

You're living in a dream world if you think any of =#FF0000that adequately explains away your earlier critique of his (and Leeds') defensive alingment. He defends where he is told to and the same goes for whoever plays stand-off for Leeds. It's called a defensive pattern, the faces may change but the pattern doesn't. You'll have noted (or probably not) that both Leeds and Wigan maintained their defensive pattern despite Sinfield and O'Loughlin playing stand-off on Friday.

I'm interested to know exactly where you think half-backs should defend from your original comment?

You ever heard of the Four Stages of Competence?

This guy is a cut & dry Unconscious Incompetent.

You invited me to "have a go". So "technically"... you did.



No desire, but got involved anyway. Well done.



Alright, you want to be woken when I've gone, yet you're here responding... Quote marks aren't always used for quoting people directly, by the way. Also HTH.



That's better, makes more sense now.



You're absolutely right, so why did your fans feel the need to request stats to refute that our absentees affected us just as much as yours did, and then complain when proven wrong?



Yup, and McGuire's solitary break could have too. Richards would more likely have kicked our goals, Deacon could have set up Joel Tomkins on another rampaging run through and scored. Richards and Gleeson would probably have shut the wing down rather than letting you make "easy" breaks. Basically, you've just backed up my point in the first place... Our unavailable players affected our chances, yours affected yours.



Because no-one asked, maybe knowing it would be ridiculous? Pat Richards may well have been the single stand-out player of last season, and the top points scorer for the last 4, but none of us expect him to be statistically better than everybody in the league. Obviously it was nice when Richards' stats did beat the combination of Danny McGuire and Jamie Peacock, and you can't deny that scoring stats that actually run a combination of Ryan Hall AND Kevin Sinfield very close are extremely attractive too.

I just love the attempt to convince us all that actually McGuire has been defending on the wing for years simply to justify his earlier bizarre comment.

"Nope you're all wrong, McGuire, despite being a stand-off, actually both attacks and defends on the wing and has done for years. I can't see why you haven't noticed it before. Everyone knows that Leeds' wingers are McGuire on the right wing and Ryan Bailey on the left."

Just think of me as the Sam Tomkins of SS.com.

Look, let me make this plain... I've WATCHED him defend there. Seen him in that position. Nothing inherently wrong with it, and I never said there was, but I've seen him there many times. If he's now changed to slotting infield a bit, fine, I'll take your word for it, I don't get to see every Leeds game. But believe me, I'll take note next time I see him play.




Like I said, did I actually say there was anything wrong with it? My view was that he rested himself out there to make his attack more effective. Read the rest of what I just said above.

Danny McGuire is an attacking player. He is at his best when he has defenders scattered or the line stretched and can use his elusive running to break through. You can't deny that.

I've seen him get back in defence too, making try-saving tackles. These are normally the job of the wingers and full back who are supposed to be quick enough to get back infield from the fringe of play without leaving a gaping hole in the middle of the field. His speed is his asset there.

Like I said, if his positioning has been changed, I'll look out for it. I don't sit there watching a Leeds match looking for exactly where McGuire is in the line at every tackle, but I've noticed it in the past.

I think you summed Him up quite well there.

So it's gone from he "often" defends on the wing to you've "watched" him defend there, that's an interesting evolution. And would be acceptable if you didn't then go on in your next sentence to suggest yet again that he has now, only recently, changed where he defends.
So let me make this plain too, since you appear incapable, despite tvoc's posts in addition to my own, to comprehend this point.

McGuire does not defend on the wing.

McGuire does not attack on the wing.

If he did he would be a winger.

Are you still convinced that a stand-off is actually a winger?

It hasn't been changed though, that's the problem with your critique.

Wouldn't it be simpler to just accept you were wrong and withdraw the statement gracefully? You might even regain some of your lost credibility if you did so.

Why the need for an insult? I thought you wanted discussion and debate? There would be a hint of poetic justice if you were now to be banned for breaching the AUP.

See, my kind of poetic justice doesn't involve you needing a knee reconstruction.

To be fair Him, McGuire does both defend and attack on the wing. Well, I say 'wing', it's kind of 'wing-ish', you know, about 2 people in, you know, just the inside of the centre, you know, that spot where the Stand Off usually plays. There.

I can't ever remember seeing him defend on the wing, I know Sean Long & Briers have done it in the past.

Yeah I suppose I was being a bit harsh, it is very close to the wing. I'll see if the 8 year olds I coach on a saturday morning can distinguish the difference between where a stand-off defends and where a winger defends. You know, some of them will get it wrong.

In all seriousness, both McGuire & Burrow do defend in the centres. Always have done. But certainly not on the wing. Unless injured, in which case it's pretty standard in RL to throw someone out on the wing to run it off.

Sorry if I'm patronising Tony, it's just I'm trying to involve Fishsta in the conversation so I wanted to write it at a level he could understand too.

No, because I know what I've seen. I've lost no credibility at all.

Y'know, if you do a search on "Danny McGuire News" on google, one of the first links you come to talks of him regaining possession from Ade Gardner (a winger), and running to score on the wing.

If you want to show that I'm wrong, in the words of Sam Buca II... Prove it.



Except that it wasn't me, it was Remarkable_Rhinos.

At first, I thought you were just ill-informed. Now, I just think you're 8.

Seriously.

Have you any to lose?

Exactly, to lose credibility he'd have had to have some to start with.