I said elsewhere that Kirke upped his work rate and the quality of his work. However, lets temper this praise shall we. 8 drives people. 8 drives. I know that is a good "effort" from the cowardly lion but it's stuill only 8 drives.

I think you're giving him too much praise! At least one of those drives was a dodgy offload that fell into his hands whilst he was napping behind everyone else on the Cas line.

Who was at fault when he spilled that ball close to the line late on in the second half? Him or a certain Aussie hooker that provided the pass?

I thought his 1st half stint in replace of JP was vital, same goes for Bailey. Hudson and Chase were flying out the tackles in that set trying to get on top of Leeds but that pair really stood up.

That's obviously a tough call for G1 to make but I'd expect both were 100% at fault for the error.

I agree with TVOC.

Its been causing me much consternation. My brain hurts.

I'll go old skool and blame Jamie Mathiou.

League Express have Opta stats for the game which show Kirke as having 7 drives for 61m and 18 tackles with no misses. By way of comparison Bailey had 13 drives/97 metres and 20/0 on the tackle count.

Then you perhaps have to question Opta's ability to count to 8 in that case. I keep a track of Kirke in the televised Challenge Cup games in the unlikely event that Kirke becomes an item for discussion on the forum.

I counted 8 occasions he took the ball in and was tackled in possession (+ the one for the knock on.)

As ever while everyone accepts what Opta outputs I question just how accurate they are.

If anyone is interested, here are Kirke's carry stats:

1st spell, on 29 mins - off 51 mins (22 min stint, 7 carries 69 metres)

30:25 - 6 mt
31:55 - 9 mt
33:00 - 5 mt
35:00 - 22 mt
40:10 - 7 mt
46:20 - 10 mt
49:00 - 10 mt

2nd spell, on 68 mins - off 76 mins (8 min stint, 1 carry 12 metres)

74:20 - 12 mt

Total, 30 min, 8 carries 81 metres

(Interestingly if you ignore the drop-out return on 35 min (although I've no idea why you would) we come close to a consensus so you have to wonder have they mistakenly given those metres to another player? What .... surely not, however people may recall last season when Kirke was erroneously credited with a Rob Burrow 40/20 in one of the many WTF Opta calls.)

Classic Bailey - ripping it up Mutha's !!!

Do you know what he earns? That's what matters in terms of managing the cap - I'd guess he's one of our cheapest 1st teamers.

As for the original question - I'm defending Kirke as he's a permanent scapegoat on here even on occasions where far more experienced and better played members of our squad under perform

No, but then again you don't either.


Don't berate nantwitch for not knowing what kirke earns then take a quantum leap into guessing he's our cheapest player.

FWIW, I'll take a guess. He's been a 1st team regular, not a squad player, a member of the 1st 17 when fit for 6 seasons now. he's not a kid, not an up and coming player. I'll guess he's on more than Ambler, Amor, Singleton, Pitts and any other kid capable of 5 hit ups a game in the Academy. I'll guess he was on more than Burgess, a far better player.

But you know what, his wage is a red herring. Yes, in a salary cap era you do not players to make up your squad who are not big earners. Players desperate to make the 1st team. Those players do not, however, earn a pass when it comes to taking the ball in just because they're on a cheap wage. If Kirke is on less than, Say Peacock, and wants to earn more then frikkin well stop playing like a scardy cat.

Those occasions are few and far between. I'm his biggest critic, I think all would agree. I have praised his better displays on here when they have, rarely happened. Like Sunday for example. But when 4 carries is the magic number more than any other then perhaps, just perhaps, he's gets so much stick because he deserves it on such a regular basis?

Kallum Watkins' two penalty concessions in the opening 7 minutes, Ryan Hall's two knock ons (one unfortunate but the other self-inflicted leading to red zone pressure just before half-time) Ablett's knock on, needless penalty for lifting a leg and not knowing where his left foot was for a potential score, Webb's NFL pass to Delaney are all incidents we could look at and comment on but appear not to while we agonise over Kirke's continued selection even after one of his relatively good days.

(Obviously I started the thread so include myself in any implied criticism but it was an attempt to praise his improved performance.)

Is that because the other players earn some grace for the consistency of their displays in games past whereas Kirke earns some scorn because of the consistency of his displays in games past?

When hall strings three or four games together akin to Sunday, it'll be the norm and not an aberration, likewise Ablett etc.

When kirke's 4 drive games become an aberration and not the norm, perhaps the heat will simmer a little?

Will it though?

I tried to establish with you the other week by which arithmetical measure Kirke's average contribution would be judged and bar a promise of a reply cooked up by your accountant I don't recall us establishing the required parameters.

Here is a case in point where with eight drives in a 30 minute performance (+ 18 tackles with no misses) it's for some still a case of 'is that all.'

Clearly the bloke can't win if we fail to identify a standard with which to judge him by and still attempt to undermine even his better days?



Ablett played the full 80 minutes(?) and carried the ball fewer times than Kirke did in 30 minutes and he made around half the number of carries and tackles as his fellow centre Watkins.

I often get to here what an 'unsung hero' he is and somewhat ironically usually it's from posters singing his praises.

I was at all those games. My non participation in big games for Leeds has produced startling results. As I won't be there for this final it raises Leeds chances considerably. 50-50.

For me, and I can only speak for me, there should be no more 4 carry games all year barring an injury. He's used his quota of such laziness up by some distance.

I'd have thought the minimum we should expect, absolute minimum, is 6 carries from a prop who doesn't leave the field injured. That shouldn't be cause for rejoice, just a minimum expected work rate.

His display drew praise from me.
I repeat, he drew praise from me.
He didn't.


I haven't seen the stats but your comparison is flawed on a number of levels. He didn't play 80 mins. He was playing centre not prop. He was playing with half of his face hanging off. Was Sunday an aberration for Ablett (in terms of hit ups or below his usual work rate (maybe due to the facial injury?).

He is. Do you think Kirke is a better player than Carl Ablett? Is that seriously what you're saying?

I repeat, I praised Kirke's display. You're the guy who started a thread thinking 8 carries (or is it 7) from a prop is a big deal. It's better than what he usually does (and I commented elsewhere that the quality of his carries) but would it have been thread worthy in itself had his past work rate been so appallingly lacking?

OK then, thank you for that reply.

On Sunday he exceeded that minimum standard by 33%





While tempering the praise with more of the above which tends to imply the praise is a little disingenuous despite the number of carries being comfortably in excess of the minimum standard you have finally set out above.



I specifically used the example of Ablett from Sunday as your views on the two players are well known to forum regulars. The comparison (as Ablett is a centre these days) was more with Watkins but I agree it was flawed as it was based on a false assumption that he had played the full eighty. Outside backs at Leeds generally do and as he had clearly stayed on after the 21st minute clash of heads and started the 2nd half with the missed opportunity to score I'd missed him leaving the field on 52 minutes to be replaced by Delaney.



I didn't think it was a big deal as such but I did think it was a good effort for the time he was out on the pitch and in the absence of the weekly Opta thread felt some others might still like to comment.

Are 8 carries better than what he usually does? When I calculated the average number of carries he has made per SL Regular Round game this season the arithmetic mean and median figure was (IIRC) 7, so yes 8 is better but I'd suggest only a marginal improvement over his average.

Having detailed to the minute and second (should anyone still having access to the recording wish to confirm for themselves) using the on screen BBC timings - each of Kirke's carries I stand by my assessment of eight carries rather than accepting Opta's reported figure at face value. Given that in 2009 Kirke was (and still is) credited with a 40/20 which actually came off the boot of Rob Burrow I'm still inclined to believe what I see rather than what I'm told to believe by people who on occasions have been known to mix up one of the tallest players in SL with the smallest.

The only question now is which player received the credit for Kirke's 22 meter drop-out return in the 35th minute?

It would seem so.

Yes. Quite, so 8 is more than he usually does, if you accept that the median figure of 7 is what he "usually" does. It could be argued 4 is what he usually does as you produced figures that show he makes 4 carries in a game much more than he makes any other number of carries. As we're talking about an actual player making actual drives that might be a better indicator rather than a median. It's rugby not maths I'll remind you. It's nearly 15%. Sounds a lot more when you use percentages doesn't it, especially when the figures are in single figures? Of Course, if 4 is what he "usually" does it's 100% better.
As I have no intention to check I'll take you on face value, as I do with Opta. But people make mistakes don't they, even statisticians,

Given you didn't see Delaney replace Ablett I am impressed with your self belief.

I can't wait to find out.

Yes it certainly would.



You had your chance previously to state which arithmetic method you would be using. Perhaps you should have said then it would be the mode? As the mean and median produce a higher (consistent) figure it's arguable they give a fairer reflection but thems the breaks.

Personally I'm inclined to use the 'mean' especially at this point in the season where highs and lows, variable game minutes, in game injuries etc can be smoothed out over the course of 21 appearances.




Given this week's example with Kirke you perhaps have to question whether those '4' counts are 100% accurate also.

The timings are there to the second, they were all Ian Kirke drives and there were eight of them in total (excluding a ninth drive that ended with the knock on.) Such an individual service is not offered by Opta unfortunately but whether people accept those precise proveable examples or go with the 'Kirke kicked a 40/20 in 2009' brigade is entirely up to them in this and any other instance.

I like my statistics to be accurate (pretty pointless if they're not) but no human can ever guarantee absolute accuracy and it's possible I make the odd mistake as well. Kirke did make eight drives though on Sunday.

I wasn't particularly watching for or attempting to record the substitutions on Sunday. I like to watch the game for it's own sake and for my own records it only matters whether the substitutes get on to the field at some point of the match. The four subs did - Ablett started and as he was replaced at some point by Delaney (who also started) I must have missed it but there again I wasn't looking out for it so I'll forgive myself .... just this once.

That's the problem with this country. Too many liberal do-gooders.

How very dare you!

I've been called some things in my time but there's a limit.

If you like seeing statistical errors, the Rhinos' website is right up there with the best. Some of it looks like it was put together as a school project.

a prop should make at least 15 carries when starting the game and 10 when they are not. 5 and 6 carries is'nt a fantastic work rate for someone who gets at least 30 minutes of game time in fact its poor kirke should be looking to take at least 2 a set i can't recall him ever doing this. for a giant of a man he runs the ball in like someone half his size.

Agree 100%. I've waited a few years now for him to develop into a natural replacement for JP. But sadly their respective application on the field is at opposite ends of the scale. If you could only "bottle" JP's attitude (that almost single-handedly won the Bulls the 2005 GF) and got Kirkey to drink some...