Quite possibly. Though it's interesting that until last week, our results had improved compared to those from the start of the season. Which would be surprising if we were making less impact on collision. I could of course work out the stats for all the other forward to confirm or refute this. But I'm not going to.

Well the problem with looking at stats and drawing conclusions from them is that they are very one dimensional. The decreasing of the meters per carry may be to do with a change in tactics by the team, or the fact that the refs generally get slacker on offside / slowing the play down as the season progresses.

I am a fan of stats and I think that they are useful when trying to analyse some areas over a reasonable period, but they will never be the only factor in determining the strengths of a player

Absolutely paramount eh?

[uCas away[/u. Southstander.com man of the match poll.

Points Player %
10 McGuire 38%
8 Senior 25%
6 Sinfield 13%

[uHuddersfield at Home[/u. Southstander.com man of the match poll.

10 Sinfield 47%
7 Buderus 18%
7 Webb 18%


[uWakefield away.[/u Southstander.com man of the match poll.

10 Senior 34%
8 Burrow 21%
6 Sinfield 17%

[uHull KR at home.[/u Southstander.com man of the match poll.

10 McGuire 27%
8 Bailey 23%
5 Diskin 15%
5 Sinfield 15%

I'd say it's you who needs to get those match videos. Buderus features just the once and, guess what, that's the same amount that Diskin features.

you realise that most people who vote on these are fekkwits, as labelled by your good self, I mean Damo can vote on them FFS

Absolutely. But i couldn't recall Buderus doing a great deal of note in the games he referred to. I did recall one game (Hudd away) which, in fairness to me, given Gotcha claims I am not providing a balanced view, I gave Buderus credit for having a large influence. But definitely not the games Gotcha mentioned.

So, given that is is all about opinions, the easiest way to check was what the masses thought. Given that SOuthstander.com is probably a fairly reflective cross section of the supporter base it was interesting how little impact Buderus seems to have had on those fans in those games.

Meaning that either Gotcha was making it up or that Gotcha is an Island. I think he is an Island. Fantasy Island.

Gotcha is the short one btw.

Gareth, I can not believe you have really stooped that low to try and win an argument. Jesus that is really scraping the barrell.

I will be shocked if there is 100 people who vote in those polls. Are you really saying that is reflective of a game?

In 9 out of 10 of those sort of votes the man of the match is the person who scores, it is that simple on them, you know those same peopel you often call s for that type of thing. I suggest you need to get hold of those videos, your memory's quite clearly gone on those games.

Just looking further at those so called important man of the match polls on Southstander.

The guy who apparently contributed virtually nothing to us last season topped those polls on 4 occassions, and had votes for every single match he played in.

Are you still saying this voting poll is what is reflective? or are you prepared to change your view on "contributed virtually nothing"?

Strangely, to say he "contributed virtually nothing" in one of those games he actually achieved the highest voting for any Man of the Match in the last two seasons. Are you still saying this is reflective?

By a strange coincidence last season Diskin didn't receive votes for Man of the Match in ANY single match throughout the whole season. Considering this is reflective of performances, are you prepared to now say that Diskin "Contributed absolutely nothing" to our season last year?

Oh, and by the way, I think this type of post is usuall followed by a



, and a you have been owned mate.

If we're going to debate like grown ups, here is how it should work. You have made a statement that, in your opinion, Buderus was a major influence in four specific games. In my opinion he wasn't.

If the discussion is going to move beyond "oh yes he was, oh no he wasn't". We have to take it further. To quantify my rebuttal of your proposition, I have provided objective evidence. It is the opinions of a cross section of leeds supporters about who was the most influential players in those games you mentioned*

Is it definitive? No. Is it arguable? Yes. Does it add weight to your proposition? No. Does it add weight to mine? Yes.

Now, you can use inflammatory, childish rhetoric like you have done or you could provide something substantive to support your claims. Something, anything, other than repeating your opinion which, it seems isn't shared by me or the varied cross section of supporters that post on here.



Does it matter if 100 or 1000 people vote? Those who voted gave their opinions. Nobody, I repeat nobody gave an opinion that appears to support your proposition.

So that is it? You make a wild assertion, which I rebut with independent, intrinsic evidence and all you can offer is "watch the videos". Henry Kissinger you are not.

*I gave you too much credit. I mistakenly gave the top three from Hudds away You know, the game I recalled him playing well in. Seems MY recollection is supported by the intrinsic evidence available. The top three from Hudds at home that you recalled him being the main man in. Well, he didn't fare so well in that.

Hudds at home.
10 Watkins 33%
8 Leuluai 22%
6 Lauiti'iti 17%

So, in every single one of the games you claimed he was the major influence in our winning not one of the supporters who logged on here and took time to give their opinion of the most influential player in the game had him in the top three. Not one single time.

Shall we have a look at how he's doing in 2010? Shall we do him a favour and expand the criteria to the top ten?

56 McGuire
35 Peacock
29 Eastwood
25 Burrow
24 Leuluai
20 Webb
19 Delaney
19 Jones-Buchanan
18 Sinfield
18 Senior

Oops, he's not there. Your mates Burrow, JJB and Senior are. He's clearly had a major influence on the supporters base since he got here.

Now, I am sure all you will do is dismiss this and insult the opinions of all who have given them but is there anything, anything at all, that you can provide to give credence to your opinion? Anything?

So you don't want to debate like a grown up then. I remind you, before you knit fog. Cas Away, Hudds at home, Wakey away, Hull Kr at home. Your claims when pressed by Era of the Biff. Your off the wall, unsubstantiated, opinion that bears no scrutiny at all. Before claiming any "own age" you might want to substantiate them.

Who called them important? Slow down tiger.

Matt didn't receive votes for man of the match in ANY game last season. I'll be kind. I'll give you a chance to claim this as yet another of those occasions where you meant something completely different to what you've typed. Do you want to clarify that statement or stick with it before I demonstrate it to be another complete figment of that vivid imagination of yours?

Were any of them Cas away, Hudds home, Wakey away or Hull KR at home? If they were, we're getting somewhere. Were they?

Was this game Cas away, Hudds home, Wakey away or Hull KR at home? Was it?

This is the key Gareth, where it doesn't need to go any further.

The problem is your failure to distinguish between influence or paramount to the result, and the man of the match.

I remember a certain poster on these boards commenting on the Hull FC Challenge cup game, where a certain Ryan Hall got Man of the Match, you know the guy who got 4 tries. There was one cheeky poster on here who strived to get his point accross that just because he got the tries did not make him the best player, and that best player should have gone to Rob Burrow.

Hmmmm I wonder who that poster was.







Out of interest who was the most influential in the result against Wigan in the Challenge Cup? I think the smart money is on Smith, you know the guy who to many (me included) had a poor game.

Where have I failed to do that? I have offered evidence supportive of my opinion that Buderus was neither influential or paramount to the result. Others can judge the validity of that evidence. However they may judge it it's far more evidence than you have provided to substantiate your opinion. Stop knitting fog and provide something. Anything. Anything at all.

That intelligent poster was right. Burrow was the best player in that game. I challenged the man of the match award for Hall by referring to independent evidence that supported my opinion. I utilised the broadcast words of Jonathon Davies. Still waiting for something, anything, that supports your opinion?

Even though Burrow was clearly the most influential player in that game and should have been man of the match Hall still would've been in the top three, unlike Buderus in the games you mentioned.

So Man of the Match does not always relate to the most influential?

Or What about?



Where finally getting a bit of a pattern now. Using the evidence of a small minority from southstander, is in reality a pretty poor way of trying to back up an argument.

Can I just point out the flaw that only 10 players are put forward for MOM nominations, so to some extent the people receiving the votes are dependant on the views of whoever decides that list.

I do accept that if a player does not make SS.coms top 10 they are unlikely to stand out enough to get in the top3. Having said that, there have been times when I have not been able to vote for a player I think deserved my vote too

I hope he doesn't. I can't keep this up for much longer.

Much as he's a good player, I think we can only have 1 hooker + McShane next season. And it would be very harsh if Diskin was shown the door

I know someone who can.....

Yes we are. You make silly claims, can't back them up and can't handle it when they're shown up to be nonsense. To remind you, still awaiting anything other than your left field wacky opinion about these games. Cas away. Wakey away. Hudds at home. Hull KR at home.

I need to coin a new phrase. The term fekkwitt doesn't do you justice.

You have a real talent.

Geez where does this guy find the time ?

And to prove what exactly ??

You are of course a much bigger man than any of us G1!!! Why do you have this persistent need to continue proving so ....to the detriment of what was a healthy debate (again) ?

With ref to the photo....perhaps somebody can please give me the definition of being pathetic, childish ....and thus hypocritical in their riposte

Bore off.

The bottom line is that as a very recent Australian captain, and the best hooker of his generation in Australia before being usurped only in the last season or so by Cameron Smith, we should be expecting a heck of a lot from Buderus. He ought to be as influential as Trent Barrett was for Wigan just to give an example. As far as I can tell he's not.

Agreed. He has certainly not set Super league alight like was expected. He's had some good games, and been far from poor, but he's not lived up to the expectation. I'm not sure why this is. Could be:
Age catching up with him
only getting 40mins a game, in20min bursts
SL not being that far behind NRL
Combination of the above

So after all the bluster of folk defending him it does actually turn out that he was, in fact, a waste of money. An unnecessary signing, just like i've said all along and you've all been wasting your breath defending him.

No, not at all. I don't think he's been a waste of money. Without knowing what money he's on I don't think we can quantify it, though granted he'll be on a fair amount. He's certainly not been so expensive he's stopped us assembling our strongest squad in recent years. I'm alson not sure we'd have been better spending the cap money in another position, as our pack has good depth, and any additions to our backs would leave us wuith too many numbers, also wasting money.

Just because he's not ripped SL apart doesn't mean he's not been a good signing for us. I think he's improved our options from dummy half, he's brought aggression and impact in defense, and at times he's been a pleasure to watch.

I'd be interested to see whether the club offer him another deal, that would be an indication of how well the people who matter rate his time over here.

On the topic I think most of the failures in the situation (and I accept that there are some) are in the system/squad balance rather than the player himself. I don't think that having both Diskin & Buderus in the 17 has worked well. On their own, each are good hookers who can play the 80, together it just doesn't quite click for me. Now whether that has had longer term benefits is something I have considered this morning. Having each only play 40 mins a week allows them both to be fresher at the business end, when they need to be at their most influential.

That particular point is a bit chicken and egg. It could be argued that he'd have enjoyed more game time had his performances demanded it.