It's a valid point mate, but a point that backs up everything that others are saying. It can't work both ways. It can't be said that injuries happen tough, then say well he only made the yards because he wasn't injured.

The fact is that others have gone backwards in their metre making, and Peacock has increased his by more than double over two seasons. Some players are most definitely work shy and leave it to the man who's importance is fundamental to this side. Without him, on the evidence of the last two seasons, that side would be struggling.

Be carefull you will be seen as a moaner and forever critical of the coach and the players who have won a zillion GF rings between them.
Some people need to stop living in the past and look to the future and how we can stay at the top and win more finals in an entertaining manner.

This post is typical of why I respect Rhinoms' posts the best. He is undoubtedly an incontrovertible loyal true supporter, but has the capacity to also be insightful and not be afraid to highlight problems.
Some on here seem to delight in suggesting everything in the garden is rosey and the club should be devoid of any criticism. ...largely because of PAST achievements.

For me we have enough grunt and ability in our forward pack. The issue is likely to be one of how well conditioned they are.

I think the concerns are valid. At the same time if we get 3 or 4 of these forwards playing as well as I think they still can, then we have a pack that can compete with anyone. We didn't see that last year for a variety of reasons.

I see grounds for optimism in the expected transition of Singleton into a key part of the pack this year, and in Aiton who I think has been brought in to give energy and structure in defence more than game management in attack. Hopefully Ward can also have more input this year, and Bailey and JJB will be looking for big years I think. Clarkson stalled a bit last year IMO, but I think there's still potential there. Needs to pick his lines better among other things.

So, my optimism is not blind. It's cautious optimism. There are a lot of 'ifs' in there. But that would be the case if we'd brought in 2 or 3 new faces as well.

Longer term, we still need to recruit and promote. To be honest #7 is the position I am most concerned about replacing when the Golden Generation (TM) call it a day. There are more good forwards than good half backs knocking around.

The stats tell a different story, and indeed with Peacock the exception the rest are not producing what they were previously.



Wouldn't disagree with that at all. Although the evidence of the last couple of seasons would say you probably have to be optimistic.



This totally agree with. Although the evidence would point to the situation that if Peacock, Bailey, Kirke, and Kylie are all fit and available, that Singleton will miss out.

Interesting your point on Clarkson. I blame this coach in regressing this player. However, the stats would show that he actually had the equivalent season of Delaney last year in most areas.




I agree with this. The issue with the forwards though is that as a club we haven't moved to pick up these good forwards, despite evidence showing we have a glaring need to. I still also think that six as well as seven is not sorted.

For me I think we have a good squad and one that can compete. My concern is that they will not be best utilised.

For me, we need to get the bets out of Peacock, and I would say limit his involvement so that he is more effective. Bailey & Kirke need to step up here.
Singleton should become a first team player this year. he should take some of the load as he looks very keen.

We now have more competition in the halves, with Burrow effectively free'd up. My preference would be Burrow & Sinfield, as it provides XFactor and organisation. We have Sutcliffe and McGuire fighting to make the 13.

With Ward back, we have more back row options, which means that the likes of JJB and Delaney should not be overworked, and played injured.

In short, I think we have the squad to compete, but it needs the coach to use it correctly.

Last year's stats. My cautious optimism is based on a belief that there are, and can be, no stats for that they are still capable of it, or something like it.




I like being optimistic. Being a pessimist is depressing.






Again, that was last season. I am basing this on hope (I don't think there is any actual evidence of the coach's selection plans for 2014) that having been eased into 1st grade last year he'll be in contention from the start this year. Time will tell.



Those stats surprise me a bit, he doesn't catch the eye so much. My eye, anyway. But I still think there's a very good player in there. I hope to really see it this year.



Not sorted, but I still think Sutcliffe might grow into the role, and they do seem to have given Hardaker some consideraton in the halves. Ward will also make a good pivot. My worry is that Sutcliffe and Ward might end up a bit similar in style (although I could equally see Sutcliffe turning into a centre). But I see options for that type of player. A bona fide scrum half is what I cna't see on the horizon. There aren't actually may of them around in the league full stop, and that is a problem.

We can still buy a big forward, becasue there are plenty out there, and you can even pick a good one up from the Championship (Hill and Walmsley are examples - where you could reasonably argue we've missed out, but they suggest there may be more coal in the seam).

I do apologise for that, only had the time to reply to Rhinoms whose message was first and was planning to get to yours when I had time to do a full and proper response,



I do look at stats in detail, here's some taking into account a massive factor of amount of games played.

LEULUAI
Games Played - 2013 (22) 2012 (29)
Metres (Average Per Game) - 1860 (84.5) 2005 (69.1)
Tackles - 416 (18.9) 449 (15.4)

BAILEY
Games Played - 2013 (14) 2012 (22)
Metres - 750 (53.6) 1034 (47)
Tackles - 352 (25.1) 425 (19.3)

DELANEY
Games Played - 2013 (1icon_cool.gif 2012 (29)
Metres - 1480 (82.2) 2201 (75.9)
Tackles - 527 (29.3) 769 (26.5)

CLARKSON
Games Played - 2013 (23) 2012 (23)
Metres - 1365 (59.3) 843 (36.7)
Tackles - 575 (25) 450 (19.6)

KIRKE
Games Played - 2013 (29) 2012 (21)
Metres - 1474 (50.9) 1033 (49.2)
Tackles - 583 (20.1) 294 (14)

JJB
Games Played - 2013 (22) 2012 (20)
Metres - 1867 (84.9) 1793 (89.6)
Tackles - 681 (30.9) 531 (26.6)

...................................

All six post a healthy increase in number of tackles made per game. 5 of the 6 made increases in metres made per game. JJB the only one to do less but still totals the highest average amongst the rest of the forwards after Peacock and he missed some of our easier games like Salford, London, Widnes, Wakey x 2 which would've probably seen him overhaul his 2012 average.

An almost entire clean sweep of improvement from 2012 by the whole forwards in the two big departments, so maybe criticism of them going downhill in 2013 has been incorrect.

(Haven't done Ablett as he'd ended up playing too many games at centre in both years).

You can look at other teams and say its good that they have a more even spread across their forwards. You can also say they're extremely lacking in their backs making metres for them too. We had Hall, Hardaker and Burrow all post 3,000+ metres in 2013. Between Warrington and Saints they didn't have a single back who made more than 2,600+ and it can be easily flipped to say they actually have an over reliance on their forwards.

Actually what they highlight is that in the case of Kylie, Bailey and Delaney, they are not fit enough and capable enough of doing the same amount of game time they did previously. On the plus side of that you get more metres per carry, and as you are reading it more tackles per game.

On the downside of that of course is that in their absence/less work, someone else is having to do it, which is really resting on one man, Peacock. Which of course then comes back to if Peacock was injured, where is that work load going to come from, considering it is a massive chasm difference to those other players?

Therefore we are back to there is concerns about the pack, and with regards that you can see why people are posting these concerns.

I also made the point, which you quoted, about the additional yardage achieved by the switch of Hardaker.

THAT is what you think those stats really highlight???

It can't possibly just be the obvious and logical view that they highlight improvements in yardage and tackling?

Bailey played 8 games less, he missed 9 with a broken thumb, not exactly a massive question mark over his overall fitness to brake a thumb in RL.

Leuluai, played 23 SL games in 2010, was up to 29 in 2012, dipped down to 22 in 2013. Their's no pattern to the amount of games he's played that can be attributed to him not being fit and/or capable. He picked up an injury, it happens.

Again Delaney, he went from 22 in 2011, up to 29 in 2012, down to 18

What the games played figures shows is that sometimes you can have an injury hit year, sometimes you can get through it ok.

As for more metres per carry, all 6 actually slightly decreased in the department, they ended up with more metres per game by taking more carries in and increasing their workload.

Carries per game.....

JJB = 14.1 (2013) - 12.2 (2012)
LEULUAI = 11.6 - 8.9
DELANEY = 12.3 - 11.2
CLARKSON = 10.3 - 6.3
BAILEY = 9.1 - 7.5
KIRKE = 7.1 - 6.6

So that's Metres made, tackles, and carries they all improved on. Increased workload in both attack and defence.

So the thought that Peacock was the only real one to increase his workload whilst others sat back and let him isn't on the money.

Well thanks guys for that super input. Seen as I'm the one debating with Rhinoms I can only presume you both mean me as the 'living in the past, rose coloured glasses, harping on about the GF successes' fan.

Funny because I've mentioned many times of my dislike of Burrow starting at hooker, the none use (or almost none use of subs), and how we don't use our forwards well in the final 20m, to name but a few.

Whilst you like to make it out to be that anybody who criticises this club will be attacked upon those who won't hear no bad spoke of the Rhinos.......it's actually the other way round. If you don't agree with those that think things are wrong and you dare speak optimistically and positive about the club then you find yourself fighting several. Just look at this thread.....Me vs Gotcha, Rhinoms, Nantwich, Chapylad.

And why? Because I said the forwards aren't as bad as suggested, if done in blind loyalty then yes I deserve the title of rose tinted supporter, but check the stats I've posted. All forwards improved in key areas in 2013. I don't say things out of blind loyalty, I say them because they hold some weight.

After only 4 rounds of 2013 I made a point of saying that whilst Buderus/Burrow and Lunt/Burrow worked, McShane/Burrow didn't look like working. With a few rounds left with most just going on about it being the forwards that was the problem I pointed to the 6,7,9 and said one has to go realistically. Within 6 or 7 rounds I'd highlighted how Sinfield's tackling numbers were way above his last two years at Stand-Off and how I believed this was impacting on his attacking side. I called it before the 2012 season that Hardaker was only going to be a stopgap at centre and wasn't a long-term solution (in the 2011 GF, just before the Ablett try, Webb makes a break, offloads to Hardaker who instead of simply putting BJB over with a simple pass, grubbers the ball and it's knocked out for a drop-out, goes unremembered by most as we scored straight after but it stuck in my head as crucial evidence that he wasn't a centre). I've been one of the first to come out and say I don't see a 6 in Sutcliffe at the moment and he looks more like a centre. Maybe I'll be wrong but it certainly isn't a rose tinted view. I agreed with many that we should've given Amor a chance......we haven't, he's gone elsewhere, I move onwards and don't keep whining about past departures (whose the ones living in the past when they keep bringing up the likes of Amor, Lunt, Baldwinson etc. moving on?)

Relax Printer. Your entitled to your opinion. I don't think your making a bad a job of trying to stress your view to be honest.

I think your wrong, but time will show that. In the mean time I think others also have the right to give their opinion also.

Printer -Wher do you get its you V's me ect etc?
It's an exchange of opinions and once again i dont judge the team just on what numbers on paper say.
As for pointing out what you've said after certain rounds etc many of us have nor at any point whatsoever have i posted that you have rose tinted glasses just replied when YOU have posted about the past achievements etc.
This debate goes both ways but what is clear whether we agree or not what aplayer did in 2011/12 or 13 automatically means he can or will achieve it again.
The transitions at Centre/FB and Wing have been very good yet imo whe n i look down our pack and HOW they played last year not against a patched up bunch of strangers who will be lucky to win 3 games its still something im not 100% convinced about.
Also another part of teh debate you haven't replied to is our defence and attacking structures is that really as good as A.it can be or B.Should be??
Our intentions as a Club are clear every season which is to up there competing for finals and trophies now personally winning a trophy isnt the be all and end all for me especially if we do see 3/4 of the old guard moved on and some younger lads given games and time to settle into those spots.
We've seen the formula for giving the younger lads games and singing 1 or 2 quality additions work to near perfection over the last decade so imo that should continue now within the pack or at least start winding down the work load of some those elder statesmen.

Printer printer printer chill. It is not a competition we are not fighting you or attacking you. We are simply stating our opinions which from time to time will not agree with yours. I am a Leeds fan through and through and have supported Leeds for many years . All I want is for the coach to recognise we have other options other than the ones he uses week after week despite injuries or poor performance that is apparent to many of us. I see us going backwards not forwards. Our game is too predictable and quite frankly boring at times. We have the fan base and we have the choice of our pick of the youngsters coming into the game. But we need to buy a couple of forwards to keep us up there and to create competition for the rest of the pack. We are a big club and we are slowly slipping out of the top four in what is a pretty mediocre league. Our forwards were shot last year and are now a year older and quite possibly will struggle again as we will not lay the foundation for our exciting back line. Saying all that I would be delighted if we win the CC or the GF this year. But we are doing it with one of our hands tied behind our back and in that I mean our pack which could and should be stronger than it is. So printer mate, cockle, buddy we love you really and this forum is just a bit of fun and banter so don't get too upset MOT.

They are, and I've never (and will not ever) try to stop them from doing so, I merely question it if I have decent belief that it's not all it seems and I don't believe I'm one who has repeatedly gone about "number of GF rings" to be fair.

And I am relaxed, their was no anger in that post, more accurately passionate about the club and game. And I think it was a fair response to claims that some posters on hear think everything is rosey. They're some who are more encouraged about the future than others, but I don't really see anyone doing the everything rosey routine.

Regarding the defensive structures, I believe they improved last years. Points against decreased over the last few years and would've been even better if not for injuries as when the youngsters, although not lacking in effort made a few obvious rookie positional errors.

Regarding attacking structures. Well their's two sides to that, firstly making the metres to get into the opposition half.....we did that as highlighted by the increase in our metres made. The second, finishing off when you're down there.....this I've pointed out has been disappointing. We have an over reliance on our back 5 to score......some might say that is what they're there to do to grab the tries but the forwards could be better utilised in the final 20m. If not to pop up with a few more tries themselves then at least put doubt in the defences mind with improved dummy runs thus helping to create space outside. However the players we have in the forwards have mostly never been strong in that part of the game so I don't see it as a deterioration of them over age or issue with coaching as it's just not their natural game. A solution, new additions to the pack who can be more threatening in that department.....I point to the post above, it's not a healthy transfer market nowadays.

Another point made is correct, what a player did in 2013 or 2012 or 2011 doesn't mean they'll do the same again......but it doesn't mean it'll be a decrease either.

If the transfer market was a hive of activity with top notch players on offer then I would feel disappointed we hadn't added some more. But it simply isn't. We've still manage to probably pull off the best transfer from one SL club to another SL club for 2 years running now in Moon and then Briscoe. We don't bid over the odds and we keep our wages apparently quite sensible and not offer silly sums, which I quite prefer in the long term as a sounder strategy. If not we'd have quite probably ended up with a disappointing version of Gareth Ellis here in 2013.

Again I'm quite relaxed and realise it's all about having opinions and challenging them. I have no issue with that, if I did I wouldn't come on here if I only wanted to hear my views.

Regarding the defensive structures, I believe they improved last years. Points against decreased over the last few years and would've been even better if not for injuries as when the youngsters, although not lacking in effort made a few obvious rookie positional errors.


Printer are you 100% putting defensive errors down to just injuries and rookie mistakes?
I hope not purely because we saw many tries leaked which were as much structural and senior players at fault just as/if not more than any rookie error on show.
My final point re-past performances now every now and again we get a JP a total freak in the modern era and even IF someone like Bailey recaptures his best or at the least improves his consistency and quality of performace which he is capable of btw that still doesn't stop the need for more quality and younger players in our pack.
You cant expect or shouldn't gamble on every pack member improving year on year especially given their Age/Workload/injuries.
How our Coach employs/selects and manages our pack is just as big a concern for me as much as the players we have at our disposal.
Time will tell im looking forward to the new season all the same the Team will have my full support at games but IF i personally think things are wrong then i'll continue to post as such without looking back at 2010/11/12 etc etc.

Such a lot of effort wasted as all the stats relating to metres and tackles per game in 2012 are incomplete and understated if wishing to make a direct comparison to 2013.

The effect of which narrows all gaps in any deficits between the years (bar Jones-Buchanan metres per game with widens further in favour of 2012) and actual overturns some apparent outcomes entirely.

Any subsequent conclusions drawn based on the above may need re-assessing.

_____



I think it mainly highlights that using Opta without understanding what goes into the figures is a recipe for ending with egg all over your face.




Four of the six forwards named above (which all show an increase in carries per game in 2013 over 2012) actually made fewer carries per game in 2013 when you apply the correct calculation. The total metres and total tackles stats for the two seasons are not comparable - both are incomplete in terms of all 1st grade games played but the 2012 stats are more incomplete than 2013 ..... so to draw these conclusions based on them would by wholly pointless.



Is probably more on the money as opinions go than trying to use suspect stats that become further flawed by miscalculation on your part on this thread.

If it's your intention to 'prove' the opposite conclusion to your own point of view then carry on, I think there's a high probability you'll end up getting there..... if you haven't already.

In what way are the 2012 stats incomplete compared to 2013?

Nope not blaming things 100% on youngsters but pointing out their was a jump in points conceded in that second half of the season when they were called upon.

In 2013.....
Over the course of the first 15 games we were averaging just 16.5 points against us (to put that into perspective when we last finished as league leaders in 2009 we averaged 16.7) and only 3 of those 15 games came against teams who ended up in the bottom 5 places come season end.

In that 15th game away to Hull we lost McGuire and Watkins to injury to join Ablett and BJB, after the 16th we'd lost Sinfield, Leuluai, Bailey and Delaney.

Over the next 7 games following the Hull match our defence conceded at an average of 27 per game as we found ourselves missing quite a lot of first teamers. 5 of those 7 games were against teams who would finish the year in the bottom 5.

Once we started getting players back we conceded at just 13.6 for the final 5 games. 3 of those against playoff teams.

And also because the senior players who had been run in to the ground throughout the first half of the year and were running on low for that second half, were also responsible for those defensive blips, as rhinoms points out.

Not to mention generally teams are always more in their stride in the second half of the season than the first, especially as harder grounds become more ready.

Something that I've always respected about our players is their attitude when it comes to defeat. Lead by Sinfield, they're at their most dangerous when people are writing them off. This is great and can get us through the big games. But as they get older, and their bodies find it tougher, it's harder to relying on this experience. It's when structure, tactics, use of the bench/squad come into it. And this is where we fail. I personally believe we have a good pack. Not the best pack ever but good enough to dominate other teams on our day.

BUT any pack that's asked to run one man up rugby is going to get smashed. Any pack without runners and dummy runners is going to get smashed. Any pack that can't control the ruck is (you guessed it) going to get smashed. I have my thoughts that McDermott is a good motivator, but purely on what I've seen since he took over, isn't good enough as a tactician.

Unlike my dad, I don't expect us to win every game. But I do expect to see improvements on structure from one season to the next. But it doesn't seem to have happened. Last year Huddersfield didn't have a better team than us, however, Anderson got his team well trained and they all knew their roles. Too often for the last few years out guys have looked lost and everyone must have thought 'what do they work on in training?'.

There's no doubt we rely heavily on JP. It's up to McDermott to work out how we utilise him whilst keeping him fresh and also getting the others to play up to the standard we know they can.

For me, not having a top assistant signed up is as worrying as our transition.

As TVOC has pointed out a lot of stats are incomplete and inaccurate.
Setting that aside i'm fully aware of who was injured and when plus as Gotcha points out other factors have to be considered rather than just the numbers you quote.
Not least WHO missed the tackles ,made the errors or was just in the wrong position etc.
I'll also add i've seen stats in which show we were dominated yet won games numbers are NOT the be all and end all and prove every little especially inaccurate ones.

Tvoc has said the stats are incomplete and inaccurate, but as of yet hasn't explained how so I believe they still stand up.

And I agree, numbers aren't the be all and end, but neither should they not be highlighted. Had the question "do you think the other forwards made more or less metres/tackles/carries per game in 2013" then I'm fairly certain most would have said less, but that's not the case.

Numbers can sometimes be misleading, but so can peoples eyes (note the OP's review of JJB's 'performance' vs London).