it doesn't

subtract the 5 minutes he was wondering about seeing stars after the hit

then provide data on which team had possession when he was on the field

and in what field position, and under what circumstances

data of how long the ball was in play, and the nature of any stoppages

and then you may have a context for a meaningful analysis

Opta stats struggle with assigning a try scoring pass, let alone any of that

Tell that to Fielden who made 25 meters the other week.

Was Bailey playing in a different game to the other players mentioned?

Whatever criteria you want to attach, it's the same for everyone out there when looking at the overall figures. Unless the game between the 11th and 31st minutes took on a unique pattern dissimilar from the remaining sixty.

no its not

what if, of the 15 minutes he was compus mentus, leeds had the ball for half the time

7 minutes, less 2 or 3 stoppages, 5 minutes

that could be 4 sets

what if those 4 sets were all in the leeds 20

where supercoach bluey insists on using threequarters to take the first 2 drives of every set, after the 1st is the kick return

that leaves 12 tackes, 4 of which are the last and result in a poor kick down the oppositions throat

leaves 8 tackles, so he has a 50% hit up rate on his available plays

not bad ?

stats in isolation are meaningless

That's a lot of ducks you're lining up there to try and justify four (pretty effective) drives in twenty minutes.

of course it is

in reality he got ko'd on a drop out return didn't he?

how many plays would you speculate he had the potential to drive the ball in during his time on the field?

You're digging a hole for yourself. A dropout return should get at least 15 metres therefore 3 drives in 15 minutes got him 25 metres.

Why speculate when we have the full game stats. Leeds had 211 hit ups in eighty minutes.

An equal quarter of that would be between 52 and 53.

How many of those should a fresh prop be expected to contribute, is the answer really going to be four?

no i'm not

i'm wasting a few work minutes on some meanlingless jousting over stats about no of drives not meters gained, have another read & clear that up for yourself

ah, so the game is played in neat little segments where all the variables are equal to make statistical analysis neat and tidy

ok then,

8 sets

48 tackles, less tackle 1 & 6 is 32

what % of those should be prop forward drives, second row drives, passing moves, half backs caught in possession disappearing up their own backsides

let me have those % and I'll rate Bailey via your theory

spreadsheet rugby is the future

As per your own analysis: Since when does the thick end of 53 tackles equate to eight complete sets? Even then not every set will include a sixth tackle as the ten handling errors committed by Leeds during this game will usually prevent a kick being reached.



Who were the props V Harlequins?

Starting:
Leuluai - 7 hit ups in 24 minutes (one every 3.4 mins)
Peacock - 21 hit ups in 50 minutes (one every 2.4 mins)

Bench:
Bailey - 4 hit ups in 20 minutes (one every 5 mins)
Lauitiiti - 14 in 42 minutes (one every 3 mins)

Or does Bailey have a different role to the other designated props with ball in hand?

You don't need stats to realise Bailey is a lazy prop, I'm amazed some of you still can't see it.

(Cue "racist"

)

you see, i indulged you and again, in the manner of a rugby league politician, you avoided the question and answered a different one

you could have played along with 8 sets, for fun, but now you want that to be 11 sets 3 tackles, 4 handling errors etc. etc.

make your mind up

anyway, you again seem to have forgotten that bailey was smashed to bits so wasnt actually available for 20 minutes - which renders your comparison a bit useless

but, you asked if he has a different role to other props with ball in hand

well, actually, i thought when he came on he was different to all the other forwards in that on 2 of his drives he achieved a quick play the ball, and leeds had much more momentum in those sets, made more ground and were more of an attacking threat

a quick ptb is very much one of his strengths, coached into him by tony smith

then he got smashed and went off and i think that was a huge loss to the team in more ways than just a body down

with that answer, i bid you goodbye as its hometime

No its' not. not unless all the props are onthe field for the same 20 mins as Bailey its' not. As has been explained the circumstances of each period can differ vastly so while prop A is on the fieldwe may have little or no posession and be chasing the game through the threequaters, yet when he's replaced by prop B we may enjoy lots' of possessionand be playing through the forwards.

Maths is great but is a very flawed method of measuring a players ability and or contribution.

That said I would still like to see Baileyand Kylie up ther work rate.

wow i knew you guys were struggling but i didnt realise that you were this poor in the forwards making metres

i think we are suffering a bit under this 2 hooker thing!! i would play one hooker(buderus) and four forwards on the bench: ali, kirke, burgess and bailey.

also gibson or lee smith in the centre. im all for giving watkins a chance but lets get the machine running smoothe before we put too much on the lad.

Something that most of you haven't noticed (or chosen not to notice) is the tackle rate of Lauitiiti, 80% effectiveness, and only made 12 tackles makes him far less affective than Bailey in defense and he was on for twice as long as Bailey and Leuluai (42 mins according to [urlhttp://www.skysports.com/rugbyleague/match_facts/0,19935,11070_3086318,00.html[/url) yet I don't remember anyone mentioning he's lazy?

Aren't stats great when you pick out the bits that suit your agenda

Because he made 3x more meters than Bailey, which more than outweighs 2 less tackles and 1 more miss IMO

Nobody mentioned our top tackler is also our most creative player either. I guess that could be another notch as to why we are doing so poor as an attacking threat. Maybe the oppossition our running at Sinfield to tire out his attacking threat.

Agree there has been a lot of selective reading on this thread!!

The stats look to show players are not pulling there weight, but when you average out the game time they were all as bad as each other besides Buderus and Peacock.

Nothing much wrong with having an agenda and using official (as such as the SL website provides) stats to illustrate a point. Better than just having an agenda I suppose. My agenda here FWIW is to try to illustrate how a lack of forward strength is likely to cost Leeds over the course of a season. Any injury is a worry but if it's Peacock then Leeds will be royally screwed, IMO.

I can't help feeling that in the modern era your props ought to be managing more game time than Kylie and Bailey (was Bailey injured)? Surely two stints of 15-17 minutes or so in a game shouldn't be too much to ask. That would have the effect of reducing some of the burden on Peacock. Bailey is certainly a good enough athlete to play longer stints.

We could probably do with another forward. I'm not sure whether it neds to be a prop as such, but another pair of legs in the Kirke vein with the size/power etc to biff the ball up the middle would be quite useful, and probably doesn't need to cost the earth. We have plenty of flair players, but perhaps the platform being built is not working at the moment.

Depends on how you look at it, some would say that defenses win games. It's pointless putting 70 points past a team if they put 80 past you. Ali took twice as long as Bailey to make a similar number of tackles.

I'm not having a go at Ali here, I'm using his stats to highlight that some people on here are having what I feel is an unfair go at Bailey, especially as he went off injured.



Fair enough. I'd be interested in seeing the stats for the Catalan match a few weeks ago where I thought we played poor but won, compared to Friday where I didn't think we played as bad but lost.



I can't find anything official, but he was helped from the field late on in the first half by the physio after taking the ball in hard.

If I were to look at laziness traits in a player I would tend to look at carries and meters rather than defence, purely because in attack you have to put your hand up and take the ball in (in many instances, especially for forwards), wheras in defence you have to tackle whatever comes at you, although this does depend on where you stand in the defensive line to a certain extent.

In terms of the individual players, I think that Ali has the tendancy to look lazy and dis-interested, I'm just not convinced those stas show it