I disagree, with the more tackles per minute thing. I don't think there are that many ahead of him. Peacock is a freak, and to compare anyone else in our team against him is pointless.

The question you have to ask is why when its so black and white that he's deficient is he continuously selected, and had his contract renewed?

Maybe its because the people in charge of the club know more about running a top SL club than the fans on a forum. They are maybe able to balance more factors about a players usefulness to the squad than just how many times he carries the ball.

Slightly as an aside. Who offers/offered more value for money? Paul Sculthorpe when he was playing about 6 games a season on a large whack, or Ian Kirke likely on substantially less, but able to make it onto the field more often than not, and doing a job. Or Ali, for the last 2 seasons. How much value for money has he provided? Kirke gets a game because people like Ali have not been able to make it onto the picth as often as they should do.
This isn't fantasy RL. You can't just assemble the best 20 players, at whatever they cost. You can't have a front row of James Graham, Jamie Peacock, with Morley and Carvell on the bench. You have to have balance. Players who can play multiple positions, players who can make it onto the park more weeks than not, players who do what is needed of them. All within a financial constraint of a salary cap.

Kirke wouldn't walk into any team in SL, but he'd probably make the squad of most, and if you look around the squads of all SL teams you'll find a Kirke type player in them all. Thats how the salary cap works. So if you pay peanuts, you'll only get monkeys. If we want the likes of JP, and Sinfield, the types of player who will win you a match, you need to pad your squad out with players who can come in and do a job.

If GH has let either of those fekwitts decide contracts then he truely has lost the plot, and all my comments on the above subject are null and void

I can't be bothered looking through the stats (I'm sure someone will just to prove me wrong) but I would imagine Peacock, JJB, Ablett (when in SR), Buderus, Sinfield & Clarkson do just as much tackling in the pack.

In terms of balance and salary cap as I said earlier, Kirke was fine a few years ago when we had top earners making good yards but we don't now, Cross has gone, Burgess has gone, Eastwood has gone, Diskin has gone. Kirke is not a fringe squad player.

I agree with you on Ali, his value has been zero to the Leeds squad for the best part of 2 years now.

I can't believe that anyone would go to any length at all to try and justify 4 hit ups from a prop on such a regular basis as being acceptable.

It might be acceptable to McDermott, but it isn't acceptable to me. "Shirke", "Stealing a living" and "Cowardly lion" are all absolutely spot on for the lanky softcock.

I thought I'd have a look. Could only find 5 games (Catlans A, Hull H, Cas A, Bulls A, Hull KR A) where TVOC had done the minutes breakdown, so not the best sample. I only included Props and Second rows. Ablett has played too much centre to be considered in this though I could pull out if desired

Kirke 5 games
Mins 201
Tackles 100
Misses 3
Metres 321
Carries 45
Tackles / Min 0.498
Carries / Min 0.224

Peacock 3 games
Mins 121
Tackles 74
Misses 3
Metres 353
Carries 48
Tackles / Min 0.612
Carries / Min 0.397

Leuluai 3 games
Mins 94
Tackles 51
Misses 3
Metres 207
Carries 29
Tackles / Min 0.543
Carries / Min 0.309

Bailey 3 games
Mins 156
Tackles 86
Misses 4
Metres 255
Carries 36
Tackles / Min 0.552
Carries / Min 0.231

Jones-Buchanan 5 games
Mins 339
Tackles 181
Misses 4
Metres 409
Carries 67
Tackles / Min 0.534
Carries / Min 0.198

Cross 3 games
Mins 105
Tackles 71
Misses 5
Metres 217
Carries 29
Tackles / Min 0.676
Carries / Min 0.276

Clarkson 5 games
Mins 259
Tackles 131
Misses 7
Metres 224
Carries 40
Tackles / Min 0.506
Carries / Min 0.154

Hauraki 4 games
Mins 194
Tackles 80
Misses 6
Metres 184
Carries 34
Tackles / Min 0.412
Carries / Min 0.131

Lauiti'iti 1 game
Mins 33
Tackles 15
Misses 2
Metres 77
Carries 11
Tackles / Min 0.455
Carries / Min 0.333

Pitts 2 games
Mins 74
Tackles 30
Misses 3
Metres 90
Carries 16
Tackles / Min 0.405
Carries / Min 0.216

Burgess 2 games
Mins 93
Tackles 42
Misses 3
Metres 170
Carries 28
Tackles / Min 0.452
Carries / Min 0.301

Compared to most of the props Kirke's tackles / minute are pretty poor, though not the worst. Same with the carries per minute, which again are low but not worst.

Compared to the second rows Kirke fairs much better, with better carries per minute than all but Lauiti'iti in his 1 game. He's also at the top end of the tackles per minute.

So one question is this. is he a second row covering prop, or a prop covering second row. He's been used as an interchange prop for most of this season from what I can see.

Other things to stand out during this:

Peacock's comeback game vs Cas 101 metres, 15 carries, 17 tackles. 29 minutes. Legend
Jones-Buchanan - most minutes and tackles by far.
Hauraki comes out in these stats very badly.

Hull KR (A) : Hauraki(17): 9 - 2 (4.50) - 6 - 0 (100%) - 1 - 0
Bulls (A) : Hauraki(52): 80 - 9 (8.89) - 21 - 5 (81%) - 0 - 2
Tackles / Min 0.412
Carries / Min 0.131

Those are stats that would make Kirke blush




You're right he's not, but he should be.

I like to provide a little balance. Don't get me wrong he doesn't pull his weight, or run his weight.

But I feel the constant campaign you and others are running is a little unfair.

As you yourself say when it fits your particular agenda. What do you know about running a top SL club? Nothing. If Kirke doesn't appear to offer anything, but successive coaches keep playing him, and his contract keeps being extended, then it suggests to me that your not looking at the right things.

When Shirke makes more than 4 carries on a consistent basis I will drop it.

The sentiment is right. I am not in the opsition that coaches who select him are. However, the things I look at during matchday are work rate and aggression in collision and he rpovides none of either. If I am looking at the wrong things during matches then so be it.

The team scores the most points also wins!! If you fail to score you can never win regardless of whether you conceed or not.

Which of course he already has done on 14 of 20 SL Regular Round occasions thus far in 2011.

Can I ask by which arithmetic method you will be basing that personal assessment on?

That goes without saying. What I was trying to point out was the defence is equally as important as attack.

In fact if you make a mistake in attack you get 6 opportunities to make up for it. If you make a mistake in defence you often get punished straight away.

So how many games has he made 4 carries or fewer? I don't remember him missing too many games, but if he's made that amount in 6 games its pretty poor

I think he was not selected for one. So it could be 4 carries in 5 games. I bet there's a cuople of 5 carry games in there as well.

No, you can't.

According to the Opta stats: Ian Kirke (20 Appearances from 22 possible)

Number Of Carries - Frequency

4 - 6
5 - 1
7 - 2
8 - 3
9 - 1
10 - 2
11 - 1
12 - 2
13 - 1
14 - 1

__________





Fair enough.

Given that during the SL Regular Rds in 2011 (according to Opta) Kirke has made 158 carries in 20 appearances that gives a straight forward mean average of 7.9, a look through the weekly figures shows a median average of 8.

As both of those figures fall well outside your trigger point of 4, I mean 4, seriously ...... 4, I'll assume you'll be using the mode average.

14 carries in a game

Did that occasion include the warm up

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=486415 As a starting prop in Peacock's early season absence.

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=486415 As a starting prop in Peacock's early season absence.

that makes it more frustrating knowing he can do it (has done it) when he chooses to

So, 4 carries is his offensive "work rate" far more than anything else. Also, interestingly, he's had almost double the amount of games where his carries are in single figures than double figures. The lanky softcock must train the house down because his continual selection continually baffles me.

I don't understand the question. I'll run it past my accountant and he'll cook up an answer.

am i missing a point here but surely kirke has to hold his position in the line in attack so will get less chance to take it forward
whoever is acting at dummy half decides who gets the ball and more often than not kirke isnt the prefferred option

maybe rugby needs a football type tracker system so you can tell where players made tackles and drives and their positions when other drives are done to see how much a player contributes rather than just go on figures

Like a video camera and a dvd you mean?

sorry but kirkes stats are indefensible. he is lazy and avoids the hard stuff. i liked kirke, he did a great job early on at leeds but is now a waste of space. rather have singleton in there

I don't disagree that there could be better options in the academy, or out on loan.

I disagree that he avoids the hard stuff. Defence is equally hard if not harder stuff than attack.

I can see your point here but also understand the frustrations of the majority. Calling him a coward is way OTT. Perhaps Kirke has been told to play this way, as has been suggested - the opposite of someone like Feka who comes on for carries but can't defend well.

My problem with Kirke is that he's seemingly graduated to having a regular space in the 17 without offering anything more than he did as a squad player 2-3 years ago. Do the top teams in SL have forwards regularly selected in the 17 like Kirke who contribute so little in attack who are not youngsters? I'd have less of a problem with small number of drives if Kirke ran the ball in a lot harder like other impact forwards. At a time when few of the Leeds forwards look capable of setting a decent platform in attack, we really need more from everyone in the pack, especially big players with the potential to make large gains in the tackle.

He's always been a regular