Some good tackling stats from kirke and good metres from Bailey.
Too many missed tackles overall which i suspect a fair few came in the last 15.
Agree G re-hauraki's defence reminds of young Burgess when he 1st broke through very flat footed.
Plenty of positives though to build on and onto next week.

Agreed. If you'd have shown me those stats, and offered me a draw before the game I'd have snapped your hand off.

Obviously a little gutted we didn't hold out, but still I'm happy enough with that all things considered.

I witnessed the FG debut of ex-Leeds academy Tom Burgess yesterday and thought he showed a hell of a lot for a 1 spell 20-25 minute spell. I was eager to see his stats this morning and even I didnt think they were as good as I saw...

Metres - 89
Carries - 8
m/carry - 11.1
Tackles - 6
Misses - 1

Not only that, he was directly responsible for Elima's try as his dummy run took 3 players with him which opened up the space for Kearney to put Elima through. I just hope they ease him in instead of rushing him. Dont want him to end up like Stuart Fielden.

Or his brother, Sam, with a bust shoulder at 22/23?

Perfect example of what I mean. Good all round stats if you completely ignore the 3 missed tackles, two handling errors and 3 penalties.

Talk about agendas.

Sam's problem is more to do with his "smash" tackle techneque. A bit like SBW before he went to Union (where that kind of thing is frowned upon). Sam can still be a great without the shoulder charge though and will probably become a better defender.

Possibly but also over-developing his muscles before his frame/skeleton has fully formed due to being thrown in at the deep end at a very early age, may also have played a part in his injuries, similar to Fielden. Unlike, say, Peacock or our beloved coach McDermott who came into the f/t game at an older age when their bodies were fully mature.

Not as a rule but as I've just spent time collecting them for this particular game for another thread here they are:

Leeds substitutions:

1 - Kirke replaces Leuluai (15 mins)
2 - Clarkson replaces Pitts (31 mins)
3 - McShane replaces Buderus (31 mins)
4 - Cross replaces Hauraki (33 mins)
5 - Buderus replaces Bailey (36 mins)
6 - Leuluai replaces Kirke (48 mins)
7 - Bailey replaces Cross (51 mins)
8 - Hauraki replaces Clarkson (53 mins)
9 - Cross replaces Bailey (62 mins)
10 - Kirke replaces Leuluai (67 mins)
11 - Pitts replaces Jones-Buchanan (68 mins)
12 - Jones-Buchanan replaces Cross (75 mins)

Which roughly equates to the following game-time:

Backs (Webb, Watkins, Ablett, Senior, Hall, Sinfield, Burrow) - 80 mins each

Leuluai - 34 mins
Buderus - 75 mins
Bailey - 47 mins
Pitts - 43 mins
Hauraki - 60 mins
Jones-Buchanan - 73 mins

McShane - 49 mins
Clarkson - 22 mins
Kirke - 46 mins
Cross - 36 mins

The amount of missed tackles suprises me a little. I think it was the best Leeds have defended all season barring the last 10-15 mins. Still, it shows although the performance in general was good there are still lots of things to work on.

Indeed. The missed tackles is something that needs addressing rightaway. I note that Hauraki could do with improving his stats in that area to balance up once again being our top metres/carry forward.

Odd that fact appears to have been overlooked by some. Again.

And you ignore 27 full tackles (2nd top), 1 superb try, another try making pass, another penalty won from dummy running. Not to mention constantly taking us forward and putting us on the front foot, quality distribution, 18 carries, 15 runs from dummy half, 135 metre gain (top).

Buderus made 10 tackles more, 25 metres more and 3 carries more than your mate Bailey who also made 3 missed tackles and gave one penalty away which led to a try ... yet you praise him to the skies....why?

One of the Buderus penalties was for further tackle he made when deemed to be offside, the other 2 penalties were made for holding down when our defense was shot and one of which may (repeat may) have saved us from losing.

To carp on about his mistakes and somehow imply that these are more important that the huge positive contribution he made in his Man of the Match performance ..... I would say is evidence of an real agenda!

You choose to highlight the penalty he gave away at the end and infer the draw was his fault. Yet you never mention Senior's appalling defence that put us in that situation. Neither do you mention Webb's 2 forward passes that cost us victory or him not being at home for S Tomkin's try.

Players that are fully involved will always make some errors which is why I defend JJB who is apt to give away pens.

Buderus was the stand out player .....admit it!

Thanks tvoc.

This makes the effort of Buderus and JJB really outstanding and also not bad for Cross. If Clarkson was not injured its strange he was not on at the end with fresh legs.

That was my first thought also when compiling the changes from the Sky coverage.

Baileys hardly been mentioned has he? 110m isnt a bad effort IMO.

No I haven't.

I've commented several times that aside from his game changing penalties and errors he had a terrific game.

However, to claim he had excellent all round stats simply isn't the truth.

It's an excellent effort to be honest.

15 carries and 110m - in a blood and thunder battle - is excellent.

People asked him to cart the ball up and lead the pack - he is.

Thought he did have a good effort to be honest. Took the ball up and was a massive target for the wigan defenders, think there were 5 in one of the tackles, even when he got dumped on his managed to get a fairly QPB. Seemed to me to bring a bit more aggression gto our pack that I think we have missed.

Definitely strange that Clarkson only got 22 mins in a match of that intensity.

You'd have to question what happened to make Buderus come back on after 4 minutes on the bench with only 4 minutes of the half to play? Did Bailey take a knock?

Indeed. He certainly has bits of his game he needs to work on, but again he seemed to have more agression and pace to me when taking the ball up.

Maybe LIMA hit did more damage than suspected?

Not sure about 5, the hit up from the re-start after Webb's try I counted 4 though.

__________

Don't forget to allow for the soft metres from kick re-starts. I know there's a poster on here that tends to mark down (and quite rightly so) those soft gains .... although only when it suits of course.

This week they went to:
Bailey (2) - After the Jones-Buchanan and Webb tries
Cross (2) - 2nd half re-start and 1st penalty kicked
Kirke (1) - After Buderus try
Leuluai (1) - After 2nd penalty kicked

Classic Bloodbath

But you pick JJB as a better choice for MOM. JJB had an outstanding game with a massive tackling stint and scored a good try from a Buderus pass. But his metre per carry was the 2nd worst of the 10 forwards (5.83m per carry)

However the overall contribution made by Buderus was IMO much greater.

He did so much more than tackle (2nd top tackler with 27 tackles mostly 1st in)
He was top metre maker making even more than the kick returners easy yards.
He was our main distributor that put us on the front foot for the majority of the game.
He scored a truly great try.
He made a try assist
He gained us a penalty
He was on the field for 75 minutes
He was there (with JJB) to make that final tackle that prevented a try
He led the attacking defence that put Wigan on the back foot
He displayed leadership



Well to claim I said "excellent stats" simply isn't the truth! I actually claimed "good stats" not excellent.

As evidence not to choose him for MOM you have chosen to constantly repeat that Buderus missed 3 tackles. Well I excuse him on this occassion because he was massively involved in both our attack and defense and also he was in good company. Another 8 players missed 3 tackles also. (Sinfield, Burrow, Ablett, Senior, Bailey, Pitts, McShane and Cross) Watkins and Hall missed 2 a piece with Watkins costing us a try with one of his misses.

So in the context of the game Buderus's errors as 2nd top tackler and major influencer can be excused - I would submit.

You have twice commented on Buderus "flagging very, very badly for the last 15 minutes" I think this is unfair and probably inaccurate. IMO he was along with the rest of the team tired but still tackling including getting back for that final tackle which could have saved a try and therefore saved a point rather than contributing to a point dropped.

So you have to balance the 2 points he conceded with the points he gained for us at the other end with his try, try assist and help with gaining one of our 2 penalties

Finally if your criteria for MOM is based on missed tackles then you would have to pick Kirke as your MOM on this occassion as he missed zero tackles!!

I rest my case G1! (for the moment)

My view is a balanced one and is not based upon the statistics. It was expresed before TVOC published them. Because I didn't think Buderus was our MOM doesn't make it an extreme view. Others have said they would have had players other than Buderus as their MOM.

JJBs contribution and work rate were, IMO, immense, To say that is not to criticise Buderus, it's just an observation.

Had Buderus not made the early turnovers and committed the late penalties I would probably concede that he was deserving of MOM. But he did committ those turnovers and he did give away those penalties. These things cannot be ignored just because he is Buderus. They would not be ignored if, say, Bailey or Burrow committed them and if they had and anyone nominated them as MOM they would be held to ridicule. The two penalties, in particular, took the gloss off an otherwise excellent display.

Well I think my view has been balanced as well and is also not based on statistics and also was one I expressed on Saturday morning perhaps before you did. I too gave credit to JJB, Ablett and Sinfield.




I fully agree regarding JJB and his tackling. But our performance was much more than tackling and I am judging Buderus on his all round display worts and all. The positives outweighed the negatives by a country mile.



The early turnovers (2) as you put it had no real significance on the result which has to be put in the context of Leeds being penalised 9 times in the first 10 minutes.

Indeed if you are to seek a villain for Wigan's first try you gave to look at Bailey who compunded his facial offense with a missed tackle on Leuluai.

Moving to the two penalties in the last few minutes. No one is ignoring the fact that Buderus caused the two penalties. The last penalty was a risk worth taking as IMO it saved a defeat as the odds were strongly in favour of them scoring and there was no guarantee that he would have kicked the goal. It showed that Buderus was fully aware of the situation, thought out the odds and took the responsibility. I applaud this. What would you have said had he allowed a quick PTB and they had scored?

You cannot blame Buderus for losing a point and ignore the fact that it was Senior's error in the last few minutes that got Wigan down the length of the field and for Buderus to make a try saving tackle.

And if you are seeking scapegoats you have to include Webb & Watkins' errors that cost us points and possibly several others.

Finally I must return to your comments about Buderus "flagging very, very badly for the last 15minutes" If this were true then how was he in a position twice in the last 5 minutes to be the first up tackler at crucial moments?

IMO Buderus was the main reason we nearly won the game and possibly was the main reason we didn't lose it. hence mistakes and all he was the MOM.

I guess we will not agree on this but so what.