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.

That appears to be the case in 2010 so far but was Burgess behind last season when he made 30 appearances to Bailey's 20?

Bearing in mind that Bailey has played in 6 of the regular round games and Burgess only in 3 before the weekend.

Burgess Positives - using the averages per performance - double the carries and double the number of metres gained going forward, double the number of offloads, double the number of tackle busts, Try Assists awarded 2 (should really be 3) to nil, clean breaks also 2 to nil.

Burgess Negatives - using the averages per performance - double the number of penalties conceded, less than half the number of tackles completed, a 5% lower tackle effectiveness rating at 90%

Where they meet in the middle - using the averages per performance- handling errors

Using the stats Burgess appears a clear winner going forward while Bailey equally appears a clear winner on defence.

Bailey was injured for a while last year so i don't think the appearances stat counts mate.
Burgess is more of a "risk" at the moment whereas with Bailey we know what we get and on form he'd be my choice out of the 2.
Saying that though i'd still keep Burgess and select him ahead of Kirke on current form

Alas when Burgess plants those heels and an attacker waltzes around him it probably doesn't count for a "Missed tackle" in terms of Opta so I will continue to rely upon my eyes rather than the highly questionable (even by you) Stats provided by OPta. On this occasion anyway.

Will Ryan Hall be fit for next Friday's game?

If we go to Wigan without any recognised first team wingers, they will crucify us. Their two are playing out of their skins according to everything I've read.

Not by reports of him limping about some bars last night.

It makes you wonder if we should do a "Millward" and take the Wigan game as an opportunity to get everyone with a slight injury fit again and just accept we'll get 50 shoved up us.
We usually find it difficult to win at Wigan with a full team nevermind with 8 or 9 first teamers out

I've also promoted a similar thought on here in the last 24 hours. It's a battle Leeds appear highly unlikely to win at present so lets save ourselves for the battles to come starting with the Bulls the week after.



As the Opta stats from this season support the view that Burgess is a poorer defender than Bailey I don't see the issue with Opta for you in that regard.

On the other hand Burgess' go forward is considerably better than Baileys and an area you identified as weak in Burgess (handling) is on a par with Bailey in 2010, prior to the Hull KR match. Indeed in the Huddersfield game where they both last played together, Bailey had 2 handling errors to Burgess' non, one of Bailey's even made it on to Cullen's Boots 'N All piece this week where Bailey appeared concerned that Kevin Brown had him lined up.

I basically remain an Opta cynic and the reason I report the weekly breakdown figures on here is to allow posters to question their validity just as I frequently do myself.

"Typical"!!!

Burgess' handling does need a lot of work. It's one area of the game I don't quite get TBH - how some players seem to look like losing the ball every tackle (Watkins seems to have similar issues) whereas with others its almost a shock if they lose the ball in a collision.