I am not being dogmatic on the stats. (stats available to all) I am using stats to back an opinion already expressed and to argue a point regarding metres made by those contesting the back three positions. I had correctly tipped Bish to be selected ahead of Briscoe for the Wigan game as Briscoe had been poor in his previous game (by Briscoes high standards) in that he was woefully unaware when his opposite number scored a try. He also made other errors. Whereas BJB had looked sharp in his previous games.

It had been stated that Hall, Briscoe and Hardaker all made more metres than BJB which I have shown is not correct. I have stated that I rate Briscoe highly including his kick returns. But what you may be overlooking is the silky smooth running style of BJB that eats up the metres in a less obvious and physical manner than Hall and Briscoe but can be equally effective. Briscoe has had his share of walk-in thanks to Watkins.

What is also not recorded in the stats or by you is that BJB had the awareness to arrive centre field in the Wigan game in support of Hardaker and McGuire which should have won the game for us had DM passed. Something that Hall didn't do on the day and Briscoe may not have done had he played. This awareness, timing and positional play is why he scores so many tries that he makes look so easy.

If both are on form then perhaps Briscoe is the better of the two but as I have repeatedly stated it is form that should be used in selection for these positions which is why the coach chose him for the Wigan game ahead of Briscoe. So I disagree with you that injury is the only reason for selecting BJB. First and foremost we need the cutting edge in attack and BJB has the proven Leeds big match temperament which Biscoe has yet to prove.

Judgement may be made with eyes and sense but so much better if backed up with stats and sometimes better eyesight

Just a quick question, I've been asked by someone who likes to keep tabs of squad numbers if anyone has the 28 shirt for Leeds? They saw Robbie Ward is listed at 29 and I said I'd ask as I seem to think Frosties has a similar interest.

Cheers in advance.

Mulhern should be given a game when they feel comfortable and correct that it's right for him AND the team, not because fans don't like how few carries Kirke does.

What if it turns out to be a close game? McDermott won't throw him on for any longer than 10 minutes probably (perhaps not at all), how will that help the fatigue on our forwards? At least Kirke is trusted with game time whether people like it or not and that can be just as beneficial moving on through the season for the likes of Leuluai/Delaney who otherwise might end up doing to many minutes on Friday.

Exactly. The lack of trust in our coaching team is frightening sometimes.

I would say the lack of trust in our fringe players is even more frightening.

It is of course worth remember that our coaching team got it wrong last year, and indeed have since admitted to that. So it is hardly a bad thing for posters to express an opinion that certain options would be better.

Yes, because if you have a fatigued set of forwards Ian "2.3 carries" Kirke is just the man to give them a breather.

Hopefully the coaching team put more thought into how to introduce a teenage forward into SL action than just Kirke's carries total frustrating some fans.

The thought should always be, who would be give more contribution to the team.

If that is the question , the answer must be anyone but Ryan Bailey .

By that token then Peacock would play every single game and people would complain.

Talking of Peacock - any news on his injury?

Hopefully they do.

It still frustrates the hell out of me. It should frustrate the hell out of everybody, including the coaching staff.

It's far from good enough and the best defence of his laziness seems to be "the coaches know best".

Fair enough. But those same coaches gave a contract to and selected Joe Vickery.

It is a mystery, his carry stats seem to fluctuate between acceptable and attrocious. However, the coaches do know best, or better than us certainly. they will have forgotten more about professional RL than we will ever know. The same coach / CEO who signed and played Vickery, also dropped and showed him the door. Much as they did with Cross, Hauraki, Thackray. See they do make mistakes, but they are also bold enough to admit it and fix the situation. Kirke has been around a long time so must be doing something right, it just doesn't happen to fit in with our ideas of what a prop should do on the field.

2 carries is woeful. Nothing gets away from that

Whilst his number of carries is poor I wouldn't describe him as a lazy player.

I also don't think the only answer you get is "coaches know best". I'm sure they're well aware of all his match figures and seen as he's been in the team so long he is doing what's asked I imagine. For whatever reason, even if we don't understand/like it, they aren't really interested in Kirke getting the ball.

Also get back to Mulhern and reasons he might not have been included this week.

Last night the U19's edged to a win over Hull by 4. Leeds were without their normal starting hooker or scrum half. Maybe they didn't want to further weaken that team by taking away the starting prop.

Picking up wins and trying to reach the Academy GF is a huge thing, thought perhaps goes into how it effects the U19's lineup when we decide to give someone a game.

If you want to spell/rest a starting forward then you should target what is the most energy sapping part of the game. That would be defending.
If you want to give a rest to starting forwards from hitting the ball up then use backs - like we (and everyone else) regularly does. We have "recovery" sets during a game - ususally from a deep kick return - where the outside backs cart the ball up while the forwards watch.

Maybe some replacements are brought on to do a 10 - 15 minute defensive stint, rather than hit the ball up.

And when you have a big strong hungry winger like Hall bringing it back it's entirely sensible to get him taking that workload.

I think we sometime look at layer stats in isolation rather than as a contribution to the team effort.

Didn't really know wear to put this question and didn't want to start a new thread.

Can you pay one the gate 2night or do you you have to go to ticket office?

pay on gate!

Robbie Ward and Singleton both start at 9 & 10 respectively. Clarkson at loose with Delaney on the bench.

Bailey the one to miss out again (with BJB unsurprisingly) hmmmmm!

Boring game. Thought Singleton and Hardaker were outstanding though. Ward looks good, and how boringly predictable that they brought him off on 25 mins. Other than Cas game, still yet to see anything to suggest Sutcliffe will be the future stand off, poor game from him. Achurch hard working also, and a lot of effort from McGuire.

Zero passion from our fishy friends from umbersard. Think they'll struggle to make the 8 on that performance.

Actually was 30 minutes for Ward's opening stint, with at around 15-20 mins towards the end. After how we saw Hood and McShane used I'd say a 45-50 minute debut is anything but boringly predictable. Tried nothing fancy from dummy half (I mean that in a good way) and thought he went well in defence to say he's not the biggest and nice for him to get a try.....although he probably owes Kirk Yeaman a thank you card for that one.

Thought Achurch had a good game after a couple of butter fingers early on but I wouldn't have had him as MOM like he got at the ground. Thought both Leuluai (again impressive) and Singleton were better for me. Kirke put in a good shift it should noted. (Yes I know, "why can't he do that every week zzzzzzz"icon_wink.gif

McGuire, like Achurch, had a few early blips but his effort to create something was massive. In fact he seemed to border on trying too hard at times. Thought it was one of his best kicking games for a while tonight though.

Agree about Sutcliffe and thought it for a while. He looks like he can do something exciting at times, but an all out game managing, guiding his team around halfback? Not close at all ATM.

Overall the game was a grind, the weather made that a formality. We did try working it out wide but you saw the three quarters were very cautious about going near the sidelines, they probably would've had a field day on a dry track.

James Child was poor again. I was very close to the Moon try, I thought for sure that was a knock on/forward pass from Hall.

I thought we struggled with the weather early on and our passing was poor. In the second half we looked much more confident with the ball and never looked like losing.
Thought Hardaker was good.
The centres and wingers didn't get much chance (understandably in that weather) but Hall showed his strength and work rate with some good runs infield. Was Watkins injured by the end?
Thought Sinfield was solid throughout.
McGuire was poor to start with but wasn't helped by receiving some poor passes and got better in the 2nd half.
Leuluai is awesome.
Singleton was impressive for a young lad
Ablett looked very good until his injury.
Achurch looked good again. Would be my starting 2nd rower every week at the moment.
Robbie Ward was superb I thought. For a young lad making his debut in an important position I thought he did great. Got caught out a couple of times at marker but on the whole was very good. Let's not put too much hype or pressure on the lad though and be happy with a steady, progressive development.

For Hull, I thought the only one who looked like he might ever break through was Ellis. Too good for the rest of the Hull team in my opinion.

Not sure if Watkins was injured but Briscoe had some sort of hand injury. Ran over to the sidelines quickly to get it sorted and came back on, maybe a dislocated finger?

Achurch limped off but thought I could see him jogging on the side later on so hopefully ok.

Don't know what the problem with Ablett was, hopefully just precaution why we didn't see him again.