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.

14 errors this week, not getting much better

Juan ,i just want to point out the missed tackle you blame Bailey for when Leuleui went through watch the game again and from the behind the sticks you can see Prescott (as a dummy runner) blatantly run into Bailey and "take him out" and he still makes albeit a failed effort to get Leuleui.

Is there a 2nd point?

You're making some massive assumptions there. The other tacklers managed to get off the player and our line was set. It's far frm certain they would have scored and we will never know. I think Buderus held on because he was gassed, more of that later.

I don't gnore anything. We are discussing Buderus, not Senior. Besides, the blame for that is actually partly down to Burrow who got a little bit lost and also obstructed Senior's chase.
I am not doing that. I am appraising Buderus's performance. Others seem to be indulging in that by responding to negative comments about Buderus with negativemments about other players.
He [iwas [/igassed. I was watching him. He was struggling. That may be the coaches fault rather than the player for not spelling him enough and not making proper use of his bench but my observation is fair.

I think that takes the gloss of an excellent all round display from most of the team. There were many who contributed a great deal.

We're not a million miles apart but I seem to be only poster willing to objectively consider and not reach for excuses for Buderus's negative input. Actually, TVOC did so ealier with little reaction so I guess people are reacting to the messenger rather than the message.

Don't let the facts water down people's agendas.

I watched again and you are right and Bailey did well to have a second go. But Rhinoms can we just keep it between you and me and don't tell BB I said that?

Sorry BB I accept your man was obstructed so I now don't blame him for missing the tackle.

But it is fair to point out that the penalty he gave away led to their first try. No worse than several other players mistakes that also cost us points. I have pointed these errors out in defence of Buderus who was being unfairly lined up to carry the can for dropping a point. No agenda just facts.

You know I don't like to interject on other people's discussions but seriously .... come on people, have I taught you nothing?



I can't believe no-one has asked Juan to explain this one away.

Buderus was first in tackler therefore at the bottome of the pile under JJB etc. So Buderus was last up and by laying on it allowed our defensive line to set. However in a similar situation 2 minutes before when once again the "gassed" Buderus made the key tackle on the line they scored easily under the sticks with some excusable blame on JJB?

So the evidence was clear at this stage of the match we were not able to defend our line. So I would say it is a massive assumption to say they would not have scored as they had momentum, speed, a will to win and would have had the possession on our line.




But you cannot discuss Buderus in isolation having implied he cost us a point and ignore others players mistakes. Senior was out of position and was outpaced by a 2nd row for more than half the length of the field. This was a repeat of the same error made a few minutes before causing us to drop out under the sticks.



I am not blind to his mistakes. I am saying that his positives more than outweighed his negatives and if you are dwelling on his negatives without comment on other players mistakes, then it is fair comment to compare the performance with the other players in a team game. After we are talking of his selection as MOM which is in its self a comparision between the other players.



He may have been "gassed" but he was less "gassed" than most of the other players. As I have previously pointed out he got back to make the two laying tackles you love to point out that was penalised for in the last 3 minutes and he also had made key tackles on the line before their last try. So he was getting around and doing his bit gassed or no gassed

if they had the ball out they outnumbered us around 7 to 3 on the left. They may have knocked on but odds on they would have scored

TBH, I'd thought Wigan were likely to have scored if we hadn't held down. To put a third (? after Richards and Deacon) choice kicker into a pressure kick on the wrong side of the posts for a right footed kicker, I thought that was the right option.

Isit also fair to point out that the penalty came after he tackled a Wigan player who had collected a loose pass from Buderus or would that be unfair?

Fair but irelevant as doesn't excuse silly facial.

Any way by your rules when pointing our errors of one player you cannot mention another player!