Nice and early this week, someone at the SL website must have s[i:uards9ythi[/i:uards9ytt the bed.

Player: Metres - Carries (MT/Carry) - Tackles - Misses (Efficiency %) - Errors - Penalties

Leeds: 1495 - 203 (7.36) - 261 - 25 (91%) - 6 - 9
Bradford: 1015 - 166 (6.11) - 279 - ? (??%) - 9 - 6

Webb: 99 - 13 (7.62) - 5 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 1

Donald: 90 - 8 (11.25) - 3 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0
Smith: 109 - 14 (7.79) - 10 - 2 (83%) - 0 - 1
Senior: 96 - 14 (6.86 ) - 17 - 2 (89%) - 1 - 0
Hall: 165 - 13 (12.69 ) - 1 - 3 (25%) - 2 - 0

McGuire: 79 - 16 (4.94) - 15 - 0 (100%) - 1 - 1
Burrow: 79 - 11 (7.18 ) - 11 - 2 (85%) - 0 - 0

Leuluai: 79 - 12 (6.58 ) - 11 - 2 (85%) - 0 - 0
Buderus: 125 - 15 (8.33) - 30 - 3 (91%) - 1 - 0
Peacock: 168 - 21 (8.00) - 25 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0
Jones-Buchanan: 46 - 10 (4.60) - 27 - 2 (93%) - 0 - 1
Ablett: 76 - 10 (7.60) - 15 - 1 (94%) - 0 - 1
Sinfield: 57 - 14 (4.07 ) - 32 - 3 (91%) - 1 - 1

Gibson: 14 - 2 (7.00) - 13 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0
Lauitiiti: 113 - 13 (8.69) - 16 - 3 (84%) - 0 - 1
Bailey: 73 - 11 (6.64) - 21 - 2 (91%) - 0 - 1
Burgess: 27 - 6 (4.50) - 9 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 1

No game minutes this week as the in game recording sites missed Peacock playing any part after leaving the field on 34, so what can you do.

From the stats: handling errors much improved finally although still losing those penalty counts, Peacock outstanding once again and while Hall was good going forward his low tackle count and high miss rate doesn't do much for his tackle effectiveness percentage.

My usual gripe re the try assists goes here: this week Keith Senior only got the one with his other bizarrely being given to Lee Smith. Buderus also got nothing for supporting Lauitiiti's break and sending Donald on his way.

Previous week's stats:

[url=http://viewtopic.php?t=416269&highlight=:uards9ytHarlequins V Leeds[/url:uards9yt
[url=http://viewtopic.php?t=415140&highlight=:uards9ytLeeds V Huddersfield[/url:uards9yt
[url=http://viewtopic.php?t=414229&highlight=:uards9ytLes Catalans V Leeds[/url

My only gripe is that I was watching very closely and Ali and JJB made 4 missed tackles each. I see from that that Ali is down as 3 and JJB 2.

JJB's performance looking at those stats and and the missed tackles I know he did, are not very acceptable. That is not having a go, just that his overall action game masks a few poorer things. Again not having a go.

Penalty count checks out with the YEP though.

If i didnt know any better TVOC i would think you were being a tad sarcy with that reply.

I'm sure I don't know what you mean.



Leeds lost the second half penalty count six to one. No wonder Bradford got back in the game, well done Mr Bentham.

A better metres per carry and tackle effectiveness rate than fan favourite Kylie Leuluai - take a bow Ryan "waste of space" Bailey...

That means they won the first half 5-3. Had Bentham forgotten about the referees unwritten rule for this season.

Cummings had a word at half time.



Let's see if he can back it up next week in Hull now. Another performance like the last time he was there will do very nicely.

By tackle effectiveness you mean missed tackles to tackles made?

I say that, because if I was playing in that game I know who's tackles were more effective, and it certainly was Kylie. It might not be plenty, but it certainly had more of a bearing on the game.

Nice stats to see from Donald, breaking the advantage line. And solid in the tackling he did.

Baileys metres made looked improved on first glance.

Kylie forced Burgess to knock on and another (think it may have been Kopczak. His tackles were effective in more of a way than the OPTA stats show.

That's why, for many different reasons, stats are a useful management tool but should not be taken as the bae all and end all in determining a players performance and contribution.

I dont want to have another pick on Donald session, but how do you work that one out?

His try at the end was 50 metres. If you take that away from his 90 meters and remove the one carry, that gives only 40 meters from 7 carries, which is the worst of the backs.

I prefer to measure Donald on his weak spots, and I thought he handled himself extremely well when taking that high kick in the second half under pressure.

His try wasnt from the half way line.

But an excellent effort bumped up his average. Nowt wrong with that.

Solid all round.

Peacock usually bumps his average up by being on hand to drive the ball up after goal line drop outs as well. Pretty smart.

Donald took the ball 39 metres out having started his sprint to get in support 81 metres out. Excellent awareness and anticipation shown for that so late in the game.

Wrong

Great try that. Good stats confirmation from yourself as usual.

And he took the ball in the centre of the field rather than on the flanks which I love to see a wingman do.

The work looks to have been shared out much more equitably between the forwards.

Much better.

That stats are a little flawed. They've credit Hall with an error for Senior passing the ball behind Hall's right shoulder in the 2nd half. Should've been a Senior error that one. Lousy pass and he didn't even need to give it.

He didn't need to give it but the error is open to debate.

Stevo is right what he keeps saying on Sky, and Hall was definately gulity of it on Friday. He was far too forward. Had he hung back he would have took that with ease, and scored.

Wingers are doing this too often these days, over running their centre.

Its still up to the ball carrier to decide whether the pass is on or not though.

I accept that. But do you not think that time to think is pretty short. Any winger will tell you all they want is to be given ball in a game. If Senior makes that available then his winger should be in position for it. On Friday, Hall was further ahead than he should have been. The pass turned out bad, but it wouldn't have been had Hall been a yard or so further back.

Not mocking the kid, because like Stevo keeps saying, they are all doing it now to get that little advantage. IMO it makes it a lot harder for a centre, especially when passing a ball on quickly.

As you say its debateable but IMO Hall was positioned well and it was a bad ball that needn't have been given.

Bradford's forwards on the night:

Player: Metres - Carries (MT/Carry) - Tackles - Misses (Efficiency %) - Errors - Penalties

Bradford: 1015 - 166 (6.11) - 279 - ? (??%) - 9 - 6

Lynch: 109 - 14 (7.79) - 31 - 5 (86%) - 0 - 0
Newton: 28 - 9 (3.11) - 25 - 3 (89%) - 0 - 2
Scruton: 92 - 12 (7.67) - 22 - 5 (81%) - 0 - 0
Menzies: 84 - 11 (7.64 ) - 18 - 2 (90%) - 0 - 0
Langley: 66 - 10 (6.60 ) - 36 - 4 (90%) - 0 - 0
Burgess: 71 - 15 (4.73) - 29 - 0 (100%) - 2 - 2

Worrincy: 43 - 7 (6.14 ) - 8 - 4 (67%) - 0 - 0
Cook: 28 - 3 (9.33) - 13 - 1 (93%) - 0 - 0
Kopczak: 45 - 5 (9.00) - 11 - 1 (92%) - 0 - 1
Whitehead: 17 - 3 (5.67) - 13 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0

What stands out there is the starting six (bar Burgess) made no errors but missed a bundle of tackles between them. Then Worrincy comes on and returns the worst forward tackling stats of the night.

Rather than chelping to the media McNamara should be getting the tackling bags out.

81% from Scruton is shocking for a top class front rower.

Decent metres per carry from the props and second rowers though, imagine what they could achieve if they actually had a three quarter line and a couple of good half backs to work off the back of it.