Duckworth runs from dummy half...nil.
Ryan Hall runs from Dummy half 1.

Over the course of the season Ryan Hall has made more runs from dummy half than any other outside back, in fact, more than any other leeds player bar Burrow, McShane and Sinfield.

Like I said, we're watching different games Gotcha.

Hall has also played more games than most which is why I tend to think looking at an average per game gives a truer picture.

Earlier in the season you said something along the lines of the Opta Stats being a bigger work of fiction than anything JK Rowling could imagine (and that related to dummy half runs by Hall - despite Opta being correct on that occasion) and now here you are making points using the same reference material you rubbished earlier.

Jones-Bishop since his return is averaging 1.67 dummy half runs a game to Hall's 1.04 over the full season minus one game but as ever with Opta that is to miss the bigger picture. The back three will often work as a unit on deep kick returns - one fields the ball - one takes the dummy half role to either pass or scoot depending on what's in front of them at marker - the other goes to first receiver to try and pick off the quick cheap metres on the fringe against the partially set condensed defence.

I would suggest the bulk of dummy half runs from the back three are as a result of 1st tackle plays off kick returns - sometimes that will be the only option available and as such are dictated more by the direction of an opposition kick than any perceived higher work rate.

Nonetheless, Gotcha was saying that Hall didn't make metres from dummy-half runs ... and he does.

Quite.

I didn't introduce dummy half runs into the equation, Gotcha did. In fact, what he said was..



I never claimed anything regarding the interpretation of those stats, other than to demonstrate that Hall does, quite clearly work from dummy half and he's is obviously not deficient in that aspect compared to our other wingers, as Gotcha claimed he was.

I think you have misunderstood what I said. I maybe did say it simple, but all the same misunderstood.

I wasn't saying he didn't run from dummy half, I was meaning his metres made are from free space and passes to him. That is where the majority of his metres are made.

I never claimed no such thing, you have interpreted that, some fog knitting on your part it would appear. If anything he comes in too many times to dummy half. Hall's quality is space which allows him to build up momentum and hit one on one. From dummy half he can not get he legs moving, and hence why the high metres he makes come from space, rather than dummy half runs.

Concentrate on the information at hand, and comment on that rather than making up your own interpretation of things. I understand how you have come up with it, but you have still misunderstood it.

How about concentrating on what I actually said, rather than digressing on the subject. I said Hall had didn't have a good game, infact I didn't even go that far, I said Duckworth looked better than him. You said but he made all these metres, I said what about the errors and defensive mistakes. Then you appear stumped.

I suggest you read my first post, a few pages back.


Was I wrong?

.What you said was

Call me crazy but I thought you were saying Hall doesn't make metres from dummy half? Unless he goes backwards when he is making more runs from dummy half than any other Leeds outside back then I am at a loss to understand what on earth you mean, not for the first time. Then again, I suspect that means neither of us know what you mean.

Now that you have adjusted your over-simplification from "...he doesn't make them from dummy half" to "...that <[iin free space[/i> is where the majority of his metres are made.", I'm happy on that point.
Why you mentioned dummy-half work at all is beyond me.



As for ...

I don't have the energy to argue so I'll follow your example and say that's just stoopid.

So after all that bitching, nipping, and slapping, are you agreeing that Duckworth looked better than him on Friday or not?

That was the comment I made, and the one where you came wading in telling me I had an agenda against Hall. Yet, despite that and me agreeing with you that he made metres before you got your hands on the stats, that's all you have given us, his metres made. I pointed dout that Hall made two errors that gave Hull KR 8 points, and made another two that bombed two tries for us.

When you look at the metres made and average gains, the likelyhood is that had Duckworth been afforded another 8 carries to match Hall, had the team passed to the right, then he would have had another 80 metres. He didn't make errors that cost his side. He did drop a ball from a shocking piece of play from Burrow that would have been a try otherwise.

On the balance of that, I stick by what I said, Duckworth was the better player on Friday night. But I conceede, as I did two pages ago that I was harsh to say Hall would be the one to leave out.

You know very well what I meant on the dummy half and metres, you didnt' even pick it up until someone else mentions it for you.

Not at all. Not even close. Duckworth did just fine but Hall was our biggest (and sometimes only) attacking threat. Halls errors under the high ball were uncharicteristic but he more than made up for them with his all round game.

BTW, when have I bitched, nipped or slapped? I've challenged your opinion without calling you a fooking idiot I believe.

Yuo said Hall's position was the most at threat. I disagreed. I thought it pertinent that you held a similar negative view about Hall's performance in a recent game where I thought (and the stats indicated) he once again had a very good game. I did suggest you might have an agenda but that's hardly bitching etc is it? After all, you;'re the poster who didn't like JJB because of his facial hair.

Doesn't mean you are right. PS, he did more than make 200+ metres, not that one should under-estimate that. I pointed out his tackle busts and clean breaks etc.

OK, fair enough.

I rarely know what you mean. I am not sure you do.

The coaching staff have at least taught McShane how to lift in the tackle and dump an opponent while simultaneously avoiding being penalised for said foul play.

Charged with a grade b offence for said tackle.

1 game ban for McShane

I guess that saves the coach a millisecond of his valuable time then with the inevitable decision to drop McShane taken out of his hands now.

Oo - goodie.... Burrow as our 80 minute hooker, can't wait.

No hooker for 80 minutes then against Catalans.

Could dip into the Academy for whoever plays hooker there.

I expect some "innovative" thinking means we will see BJB line up at hooker though.

Get kirke in there. He's at least get his hands on the ball

That could work. As he would be very motivated to pass as to avoid getting tackled.

Win-win.

How come the Lunt loan signing from last year never worked out?

We offered a contract + payment which Hudds declined.

We wanted him at Leeds, Lunt wanted to be at Leeds, Anderson said no and as he still had 4 years on his contract with the Giants there wasn't much we could do about it.

I don't think we should get too caught up in Lunt. Remember, Huddersfield thought so little of him, they let him out on loan. Through the winter, Anderson was trying to sign a halfback so Luke Robinson could play hooker, displacing Lunt. Now he's looking good behind a dominant pack, which hookers tend to do.

Thanks.

Indeed, Season over (Barring injuries) for McShane?