Aside from the most try assists in the whole team.

Why would Jones-Bishop have to go back into the reserves after those 7 or 8 games on the wing? You can't possibly know that can you?

Perhaps he will still be needed to cover other outside backs, perhaps he will have earned his place during the extended run, perhaps if and when he is outside the seventeen required he can still go back out on loan.

Jones-Bishop is a contracted Leeds player. If he is needed by Leeds (with Donald, Watkins, Delaney, Hall, Webb unavailable/carrying injuries) then he should be recalled.

Far be it for me to defend Gareth's post, but I don't think that's exactly what he is saying.

BJB is a fullback and a good prospect for us. The only way he can develop to prove himself in that role is playing fullback in super league, which he is doing right now.

Why bring him back to play out of position on the wing? when we have others who could step in temporarily to to that.

If Webb goes down for a few weeks, then is the time to bring BJB back. Or who knows what will happen with a new coach at quins? If he is not getting the game time then, also bring him back.

I am grateful for Gotcha bringing some clarity to the point I was making and I still maintain that a season at fullback will be more benefit to BJB and us than him being here right now.

It all depends on the alternatives available to Leeds in the outside backs and whether they are better options than Jones-Bishop.

Further to the Lauitiiti enquiry.

He's been [url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=1667cleared[/url with the sin bin being sufficent punishment. Unlike Andy Raleigh, who is off to [url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/about/disciplinary_item.php?id=1666Red Hall[/url for tea, biccies and a slap on the wrist more than likely.

Isn't this "Leeds greatest ever squad" any more?

Surely there should be enough players to cope within Leeds "Greatest ever squad"?

As I stated on another thread, should have been straight red for Raleigh and it appears the RFL panel has agreed with me on viewing the incident.

My opinion pre season was that Hetherington had given coach McClennan the best squad seen at Leeds since 2004. I'm not sure you expressed an opinion at the time on the subject.



My opinion pre season was that Hetherington had given coach McClennan the best squad seen at Leeds since 2004. As most squads are built with a numerical bias in favour of the forwards a glut of injuries in the outside backs (a comparitive rarity) can still expose a squad (even the best squad assembled since 2004) especially if a first grade player is left out on loan and not recalled when injuries mount and players take to the field when clearly carrying knocks that probably require a rest.

long term I agree, but we have a short term problem, about 3 months? He could be back at quins no later than june, Maybe before.

Whatever happens I have total faith in the coaching staff. if the young lads are ready then great. I just recon if bjb was here bush and chisolm wouldn't get a look it but he's not so we shall see.

I don't think the stats back you up on this. His carries and go forward on just not good enough, neither is his football ability and discipline. Almost all the other forwards had better stats including Peacock and Burgess and these are typical. Granted he does puts in a good defensive effort but so do most of our other forwards. He just hasn't progressed

tvoc wroteicon_razz.giflayer: Metres - Carries (MT/Carry) - Tackles - Misses (Efficiency %) - Errors - Penalties

Leeds: 1157 - 204 (5.67) - 246 - 24 (91%) - 12 - 10
Huddersfield: 1129 - 189 (5.97) - 296 - ? (??%) - 13 - 8

Webb: 69 - 16 (4.31) - 5 - 2 (71%) - 1 - 1

Hall: 75 - 13 (5.77) - 4 - 1 (80%) - 3 - 0
Delaney: 92 - 14 (6.57) - 13 - 2 (87%) - 0 - 0
Senior: 88 - 10 (8.80) - 12 - 2 (86%) - 0 - 0
Watkins: 19 - 2 (9.50) - 0 - 0 (N/A) - 0 - 0

McGuire: 93 - 19 (4.89) - 13 - 0 (100%) - 3 - 0
Burrow: 66 - 19 (3.47) - 14 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 2

Leuluai: 50 - 6 (8.33) - 14 - 2 (88%) - 0 - 0
Buderus: 33 - 5 (6.60) - 18 - 1 (95%) - 1 - 1
Bailey: 44 - 8 (5.50) - 21 - 3 (88%) - 2 - 1
Peacock: 149 - 23 (6.48 ) - 32 - 1 (97%) - 0 - 0
Kirke: 77 - 10 (7.70) - 23 - 3 (88%) - 0 - 0
Jones-Buchanan: 98 - 13 (7.54) - 20 - 2 (91%) - 1 - 0

Diskin: 44 - 10 (4.40) - 20 - 1 (95%) - 1 - 0
Pitts: 21 - 7 (3.00) - 12 - 1 (92%) - 0 - 3
Lauitiiti: 46 - 10 (4.60) - 9 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0
Burgess: 93 - 19 (4.89) - 16 - 3 (84%) - 0 - 2

Try Assists - Non, Nada, Zilch. Consistency from Opta?

Top tackler Peacock, 32 at 97% effectiveness.

Previous Rounds:
Crusaders (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=444197
Castleford (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=444160
Wakefield (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=445241
Salford (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=446124
Harlequins (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=447962

And isn't a situation like this just the reason they have recall clauses in loan contracts? He is technically still part of the squad if we can recall him at any time. He can always go back to watching wave after wave of attackers flooding through the Quins defensive line at him later in the season.

I agree but I suppose I would as that was one of the possibilities I referred to earlier in the thread.

I'm with you on this one. I'd like to see him recalled if Watkins has a serious injury.

There is an argument for BJB to gain experience at FB, but the only recent example I can think of that comes close would be Lee Smith, who was still able to win a Harry Sunderland award at FB after being played almost exclusively on the wing by Leeds.

You seem to have gone backwards at junior levels (reserve and U1icon_cool.gif over the last few years. Is this poor coaching or poor scouting?
Is it Bluey?

Certainly 6th and 10th place last season is not what I'd normally associate with Leeds and you don't seem to be producing the class of young players that Saints and Wigan are.

I watch a lot of reserve / academy rugby and Leeds last season were really poor.

I understand the case for BJB being recalled, but we do have other options. Coady can come into the side for a start, and Bush may get a run as well. I want BJB to become the Leeds full back post Webb. The experience he's getting now, actually playing in his best position, will do him the world of good. If Webb gets an injury then I'd have him back in a heartbeat, but unless Coady, Bush and other youngsters are really dreadful, I'd go with them for wing/centre.

As for the halfbacks, I think that Sinfield's absence has exposed a lot of issues with both of them. McGuire does try things, but when he's asked to be the main playmaker he often makes dreadful calls as he has when playing for England. Basically he sometimes seems to panic - there certainly isn't the feeling that he's got a plan or much control over what he's doing at times.

Oddly enough, were Sinfield to be out long term (not that I want that) I think McGuire and Burrow would end up being better players, although it would take some time to develop. Our trio of halfbacks has worked spectacularly well, but they are exactly that - a trio. Given that we've actually been exceptionally lucky that none of them has had a long-term injury at the pointy end of the season.

I'd like these stats verified by TVOC before I comment



What was your issue with Bailey's discipline?

Is there a stat that illustrates the game changing abilities of the kind of challenge he put on Crabtree?

Is there a stat that shows Burgess lead feet for an important break?

He made some nice offloads yesterday. Are they reflected in your stats?

Stats are a useful guide on occasions but I judge on what I see and Bailey was immense yesterday, IMO, whatever the stats say. His stats are often like those quote but they never seem to weigh to heavily on the mind of Brian McLennan or Tony Smith before him or Darryl Powell before him.

BJB is in that squad - pity he isn't available

What the hell are the club doing letting players go when we are short on numbers ourselves? Awful management.

We weren't short at the begining of the year?

These are a quote of TVOC's stats. (so thanks TVOC)

I do agree that stats don't always give the whole picture eg creative work. My main point is that in the modern game Burgess has more football ability than Bailey and that Bailey does not cut the mustard going forward and is too slow and too easily tackled. True previous coaches have picked him as a bench man but he has not progressed beyond. History is being repeated with Kirk. I know both put in a sound defence when on the field but neither can be classed as top class and worthy of a top of the league side IMO

Two words. Salary cap!

A bit slow with the credit but otherwise..... no problem, don't mention it.

Exactly and the reason previous coaches include him in the squad.

Burgess has some attributes that Bailey doesn't both positive and negative.

Until Burgess corrects his awful handling and concrete feet he will continue, rightly, to remain behind Bailey in the coaches selections policy. These are issues Burgess has had since he broke into the side and they look no better than they did back then. There are no signs of improvement.