What stands out for me is Bailey's work rate with the ball was the equal of the other three props and his defensive work-rate was higher.

He accomplished this in less game time than the other two due to his injury.

We made double the errors that we made against Catalans. But we carried the ball 90 more times than we did against Catalans.

Because we conceded less than half the penalties we did against Catalan and were awarded more than we were against Catalan.

Imagine what we could do if we actually won a penalty count.

True about the split.

But he actually only carried the ball twice more than he did against Catalans, and actually made only the same amount of tackles.

He carried the ball only 4 times more than he did against Hull, where he was off the pitch for much longer, and yet made one tackle more against Hull.

Therefore Is it more a case that the rest in this game were not putting in the work they should have done?

A good effort from Buderus and JJB, but it is the workrate of Burgess that was maybe overlooked by most fans who noticed his knock ons.....myself included!

Also the fact that they overlooked the fact that two of those errors were from pish poor passes from Burrow. But as one stopped us scoring a try it sticks in peoples minds.

No they weren't.

As an aside, that was probably the worst game I've seen Donald have and those stats don't make for pleasant reading. Surely he can't be selected ahead of Watkins and Hall next week.

I thought they were. And it appears reading the YEP he also thought they were.

I agree on Donald. And although it was the errors that stood out, you can't excuse the missed tackles in conjunction with it.

I am sure Watkins would not have been playing next week with the same stats.

I thought the ball for the bombed try was bulleted and high but would still expect a professional to have taken it.

Ooh dont get me wrong. I would say a professional should have taken it. But the pass was still poor from what it should have been.

And considering the amount of dropped ball all over the place, I am not going to complain at it.

Spot on.

I thought he played a hight tempo game.

Always first in at the tackle, worked hard in that area and was very talkative to his fellow players.

A rare chance for him to lead the pack.

He could improve on his metres going forward however.

But overall a good, hard working display. More of the same please Mr Bailey.

?



Why more of the same? I already pointed out above, what he did on Sunday was not much different to his last two matches. Which coincidentally was stated by all and sundry as not good enough.

I watch the game as I see it not through the data it produces.

Why more of the same? He put in a solid effort. I alluded he has to improve his metres with ball in hand, but other than that I don't have a problem with him.

He was up for it and put himself about in defence.

And if we are looking at the stats (just to humour you),

he was our highest tackling prop forward. More of the same? Nah.



No miss tackles. More of the same?? Nah.



No silly penalties. More of the same?? Nah.



No handling errors?? NAH!!!



What do you want from him and the stats aren't really backing your flapable argument here.

Do you want the handling errors? See Burgess for those.

You seem to be confusing me with someone having a dig at Bailey.

I was mearly pointing out that his stats stack up no differently to his last two games. You point out his defence. Yet he made more tackles against Hull despite been off the pitch longer.

Did you say these things after the Hull and Catalans games? If you did then fair enough. But your post on the other page alludes to the fact that you though his Individual performance was better this week.

How do the team tackles for the three games stack up, and Bailey's total as a percentage?

If the team had more defending to do in those games, it stands to reason individual tackle counts will be higher.

Good point. And Baileys percentage would be much much higher for this week. Because the total tackles made is very low compared to other games, due to how much ball we had.

This is my point, my opinion isn't formed over stats from this week, last week or the week before.

I call it as I see it.

I haven't indicated anywhere that his performance was better this week than last.

On this thread I have put foward my opinion of his game against Fartown. That's all.

Actually, you were be wrong.

What he did defensively was more like what he always does but what he did with the ball this week was what we'd all asked of him, to up his work rate.

His carries were almost half as many again as they were in the Catalan game.

But your observation was spot on nonetheless and borne out by the stats.

defensively he was still the rock that he always is but he did what had been asked and upped his work rate. Had he not been injured I am sure the improvement would have been markedly higher as well.

I guess the reason I think Bailey is lazy is when I compare his potential to what he actually does.

From his stats he is Bryn Hargreaves with more missed tackles, errors and penalties and what I would assume is a much bigger salary (speculation I know, but I'm sure it would prove accurate for a player who has represented GB).

He should be a far better player than that and I question whether he has the attitude to make the most of whatever ability he has. When he burst on the scene we all thought we had a fearsome enforcer for the GB pack but he's actually pretty powderpuff.

The way he takes the ball in is pitiful at times for a bloke of his stature.

I know.

I accept that Gareth. But the team had an additional 200 carries to do this week. Therefore you would expect the individuals carries to increse accordingley. Infact if you ignore its the job of the forwards and divide the extra carries by all 17 players, then each should be carrying 11 more times.

Bailey increased his carries by 4. So in reality, did he really up his game, in relation to the team?

I think the point Gilder made with the defensive percentage of the team is still a good point though.

I agree Bailey could be more than he is and that frustrates me at times.

He does get an unwarranted amount of stick though, especially from our own fans when, peacock aside, he's certainly the equal, at least, of our other props.

Huddersfield forward stats from Sunday's match:

Griffin: 63 - 10 (6.30) - 18 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 1
Lunt: 45 - 5 (9.00) - 19 - 2 (90%) - 1 - 0
Mason: 76 - 14 (5.43) - 28 - 2 (93%) - 1 - 0
Wild: 17 - 5 (3.40) - 40 - 6 (87%) - 0 - 1
Raleigh: 63 - 9 (7.00) - 32 - 5 (86%) - 0 - 0
Mossop: 19 - 4 (4.75 ) - 26 - 1 (96%) - 0 - 1

Faiumu: 48 - 9 (5.33) - 14 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0
Jackson: 46 - 8 (5.75) - 18 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0
Sculthorpe: No Data - OPTA still thinks he's at Wakefield*

* Presumable explains some of the missing metres from Huddersfield's team total in the first post - although not that many by all accounts.

I like Stephen Wild but I'm shocked at how little work he did ball in hand considering he was the only 80 minute forward on Sunday.

Decent stint in defence but his carry stats are abysmal if correct, surprising.