Just remind us who you supported before Leeds became a decent side.

It's all the rage in upper Bradford

Yes, Barnsley equivalent of the Klu Klux Clan didn't quite pull of the idea of anonymity did it?

I had a choice yesterday, Halifax or Leeds, I chose Leeds as I always do and always will and come to that always have, despite the fact that the game at the Shay by all accounts was outstanding with attacking play aplenty.

I find watching Leeds under this current coach a pretty tedious affair.

You've alreayd been owned, stop now, its ruining whats left of your limited reputation.

........ "Lots of us"

Would the s who predicted a loss, been any happier today if we had been beaten?


A is for life..... not just for matchdays!

Oh, there's a surprise, you chose the team that wins trophies.

Thats precisely what I've been thinking about you mate. Your making a fool out of yourself

That's pretty good for you.

Obvious League for League comparisons aside, Halifax are in a better place than Leeds, at least when they enter the playing field they look like they know what they are doing.

PS

Leeds always come first, alwayshave always will, my soft spot for Halifax is due to them being my local side and they seserve the pople of Halifax to put something back into the club.

I think the decline has been gradual which I would expect under the current style of management Leeds have in place, it has taken this long to really remove totally the DNA left behind by Tony Smith, we now have arm round shoulder one of the boys Bluey 100%.

leeds were poor in 06 under smith and all but the last month of 07.
i will be happy if bluey recreates what happened in 07.i suspect some people wouldn't

Oh, Matty Matty!

Good job I have the sense and judgment not to indulge in fekkwittedry. Bailey's carries were an a par with all the other props and his tackle count was the best of the three (with no misses).

This was acheived in less game time than the other props due to his injury.

On a par?

He actually made 19% less carried than Burgess, and Burgess made 1.8 meters per carry more.

I know which statistics I would want to see from my prop, and Burgess would certainly come first on that one. Although even he needs to buck his ideas up.

No, not on a par, you're right.

Bailey was actually far better than Butterfingers Burgess. Burgess made 3 more carries and his YPC were higher, granted but he made fewer tackles and the killer for me were the 3 handling errors and the penalty.

Ole butterfingers also made a crucial handling error clearing our lines last week that led to a Catalan try.

I cant argue with the erros, except for two of them were pish poor passes. Although I expect Bailey might also have had some poor ones to him too.

But he made two less tackles, despite been on 11 minutes less than Bailey. He made 1 tackle every two minutes basiscally to time on field. therefore with the difference off the field he could have made another 5, which would have put him ahead of Bailey.

Also I showed my figures incorrectly before. He actually made 23% more carries than Bailey. That is despite been on the field 11 minutes less.

Statistics can be spun which ever way you like. But Burgess was by far the best workrate for the props on Sunday.

Where are you getting your minutes on the field from because I thought Bailey spent the least time on the pitch of the three?

Well in truth. It was from the Sky website, which was wrong with the Kylie minutes. But that is what they said.

yes, I think they made an error. It was intended to sub Kylie on about 30 mins but Bailey got injured so they kept Kylie on and brought Bailey off. IIRC Bailey returned for 1 more stint in the 2nd half but didn't see the game out.

From nothing more than observation (which is clearly more reliable than Sky's stats) I think Bailey spent far less on the field than Kylie and Butterfingers.

I thought Bailey had a pretty decent game on Sunday.

If you looked at him at a scrum or at the start of a set he was trying his best to lift the players when they looked abit flat.

Not at all.
He was saying you run it in lads I`m worried I might get hurt.

Looking at it again, and I know about the Kylie mix up, but I dont think they are wrong with Bailey.

It has Bailey off on 34 minutes, which is correct. Back on on 53 minutes, again correct. Off on 68 minutes, and back on on 78 minutes.

Thats 51 minutes. Burgess definately did not spend that time on the field.

They ARE wrong with Bailey. He was subbed inside 30 mins.