Me.

Disingenuous.

How very dare you.




What does it mean?

Is that because it highlights yet again your poor inconsistencies and hypocrisy?

While you may have I don't recall it forming any part of your critique of said player's performance last week.



I was hoping you would know, afterall you've used it to describe one of my posts re 'Overseas Trained' quotas in the past.

No, it's because it's the easiest way to get to London you buffoon.

I take it the insult is a sign of desperation?

You asked a daft question. You asked if I needed to leave for a train to highlight my inconsistency and hypocrisy.

I need to leave for a train to get to London.

Durgh!

I thought you'd gone.

Never mind we can always revisit how much of a tiss you have got yourself into another time.

I'm leaving now but don't worry. There's free Wifi in the first class carriage. But it is a bit slow, not unlike your good self.

The opening 20:

46 seconds: =#FF0000Peacock penalised for a high tackle.
3 mins: =#FF0000Sinfield loose pass intercepted
5 mins: =#FF0000McGuire penalised for a double-movement
6 mins: =#FF0000Senior/Ablett penalised for offside
9 mins: =#FF0000Bailey knock on
10 mins: =#FF0000Bailey penalised for late off the ball challenge

That's not too bad by Leeds' standards (and Hull KR were very proficient) but as coach McClennan was asking for Leeds to get out of the blocks first for a change it didn't really happen, did it?

Oh goody, so we can continue.

Can we just break it down for the ones a bit slow like me.

Last week Kirke was critisized by your good self for only making 6 carries in a match against St Helens. You were astounded you thought this never happens been so low, and were then show by tvoc that it had happend often with another player this season.

People gave some credit to Kirke last week because of his defence in the match. Your response was that he could afford to do this due to "his lazy softcockery in the amount of times he carried the ball".

This week we have another player (Bailey) who made those same number of carries, and actually managed 6 metres less yardage than Kirke last week (1 meter per carry less). You first tried to justify this as Bailey had done his bit in defence. A perfectly valid argument, but one you dismissed when it came to Kirke last week, a bit hyprocritical wouldn't you say? or at least an inconsistent view.

Then with a bit more information you decided that Bailey's low carries were excusable because Leeds had hardly had the ball in his first stint on the pitch. Again a perfectly valid argument for his first stint.

What you failed to acknowledge however, was that in this game the Leeds team carried the ball for the second highest number of times they had done in a game this year, and 19 more times than they had the previous week. Now it does not take much to work out that as Leeds had carried the ball a very low number of times in the first 20 minutes of the game, that as the number of carries at the end of the game was high, that it goes without saying that for 60 minutes of the game we carried the ball much higher than average. In the interests of fairness it would also be fair to assume that any player who had played in that first stint would have had ample opportunity to redeem themselves on the carries in their next stint.

By contrast to this, last week against Saints, when Kirke entered the field as a sub, he came on at a point where the momentum had shifted and Saints were dominating the game with a large percentage of the ball. For some reason this does not seem to have been taken into account when critisizing him last week, unlike the player this week. Could it be that you might have learned something from last weeks critique?

It should also be noted that taking our forwards as group this week, not including hookers, they carried the ball more times than they did last week against Saints, which you would expect from the additional carries. So wouldn't it be fair to assume that whichever player carried the ball the lowest this week would still have exceeded whoever it was last week?

I also wish to add, that I am not critisising Bailey. I thought at the game only Ambler could hold his head high from the whole group of forwards. Although since seeing those stats, Peacock really is immense.

Gotcha,

I started reading your post as the train puled out of Leeds. I nodded off and we're now heading out of Wakefield.

Please keep posting the drivel as it will make my journey speed by.

Yawn.

Just on this part (as I've been implicated and without wishing to contradict anything I may have said last week) I believe I used the term 'single digit carries' rather than 6 specifically and I gave Carl Ablett as an example of a player that more often than not had failed to reach my precise terminology re carries this season. When pressed by G1 to name any games where Ablett had carried 6 (or less) I presented several instances from 2009 in support of one such instance from this season.

As you were.

It's ok, I don't need to do anymore.

If you are prepared to acknowledge you were wrong, then fair enough. Otherwise it doesn't need anymore for people to realise that when you berate posters for critisising that your post is worthless and full of hypocrisy.

TVOC

Whilst you're very kindly helping the forum by translating what Gotcha means from the drivel he actually posts could you help with the following please?

"You were astounded you thought this never happens been so low, and then were show byTVOC"

TIA

There are limits and I know mine.

Fair and valid points

Some more of the Opta categories that I don't usually bother to bore you all with:

Offloads =#0000BF26 =#FF00002
Attacking Kicks =#0000BF11 =#FF000012
Runs from Dummy Half =#0000BF33 =#FF000026
Tackle Busts =#0000BF33 =#FF000018
Marker Tackles =#0000BF43 =#FF000034
Clean Breaks =#0000BF5 =#FF00003
Kicks In General Play =#0000BF17 =#FF000023

The Offload comparison is incredible really considering the eventual outcome. I guess it only further emphasises that it was Rovers kicking game that won them the game.

Bump.

Just to see if the Hyprocrite is man enough to admit his error yet.

Soz Gotcha babe. I've been (note, been and not being) busy.

What was I wrong about? Did I think I was talking to Phil Daly but I was really having a day dream?

I've forgotten. Give me a moment to refresh myself and re-read the saliva you've dribbled onto this thread.

Right,

I've re read the thread and wonder what I was was wrong about?

Was it when I said Bailey's 6 drives was not good enough?

Was it when I said that his 31 tackles was impressive?

Was it when I noted that Leeds had very little possession during Bailey's 1st stint which might have contributed to the low carry count?

What was it Gotcha? What was I wrong about? Help me out will you. Quote what I said on this thread that was wrong.

Bump.

I'm being nice by reminding Gotcha about this.

Thank you. But I still don't expect anything positive still.

What you thanking him for? He was bumping it because of your failure to answer me eejit.

Save yourself the time. I've got too much on my hands to play with you the next two weeks.

No, he was bumping it because of your failure, full stop.

Full of self importance again?

Lets ask him eh?