So, I think its fair to say the general consensus is that Mr Kirke is not our most favoured player.

I believe most of the criticism revolves around the amount of minutes he spends on the pitch and therefore his workload.

Re-reading the RL Rag from after the GF I found the comments from the players interesting, in particular Kirke. He confirmed that his role in the squad (presumably mandated by Brain) is to come on for a few mins and give JP a little break.

If this is what, and therefore all, that the coach requires it seems he is in fact doing the job he is being paid to do. So, are we as fans right to blame Kirke, or whould we in fact be pointing teh fickle finger more towards the dugout?

Kirke's a safe pair of hands, in the metaphorical and literal sense of the word.

Like he says, it's his job to give the front line props a breather. Given both JP and Bailey can be relatively effective over long stints, he's not going to be asked to play 40-50 minutes a game every week.

While he is on the field though, he's solid defensively, doesn't tend to give away penalties or cough up possession. Neither Burgess nor Cross could offer those attributes, so Kirke was rightly being selected for that job ahead of them.

I'm not quite sure exactly what fans expect from him, given what his role in the side is - or for that matter why there's any "finger pointing" required over his continued selection?

I reckon he's got something on Gary H. Some dodgy photos or something.

To describe Kirke as average is doing average players a disservice. With the little time he does spend on the pitch he's hardly pulling up tree's and yet he has a fistfull of GF rings!!!

OK so he doesn't do much wrong but that's because he does do much, period.

Dodgy photos I tell you.

Aye, Tony Smith, Brian McLennan and Brian McDermott are all wrong, and you're right.

It's the only logical explanation.

Sometimes, the sheer f*ckwittery around here when it comes to judging players and coaches manages to amaze me, even after all this time.

MUMOOWM

Dodgy photos of GH, nothing to do with the coaches.

By the way do you get a good view from way up there?

Ian Kirke has 4 Super League winners rings, prob hasn't played an hour in all 4 finals. James Graham 5 losers medals and has probably only sat down for 15mins in all 5? Sport can be cruel sometimes.

he doesn't do enough for me ok he's steady but i don't want a 6' 5" giant to be steady i want him to bust people up hurt them in tackle, and i'm not saying he's never bust a tackle or hurt anyone but he doesn't do it enough for me. for his size he is poor.

His work rate in attack is often poor. However, due to his steady nature (rarely makes mistakes or gives away penalties) he always has a positive impact on the team. Players like Lauiti'iti bring great flair and impact, though when not on song, can put us on the backfoot through errors and penalties. The modern SL team is all based on balance. You can't have 13 Ali's on the team, nor can you have 13 Kirkes. You have to balance your stars, and your filler players. A player who knows his limitations, and is content with his place in the squad is very valuable. I think the fact that he has 4 GF rings isn't an indication what a great player he is, but its certainly an indication how important to the squad he is

Now not just sure how Kirke can win here. He is firstly being accused of not being on the field for long enough and secondly of not have good enough stats or doing enough.

Well his stats at something around 7 carries and 20 tackles per match while poor/modest if he were averaging 40 minutes per game or more are actually not bad if he averages 30 minutes per game or less.

There is only so much you can achieve per minute of on field time. If his defined role is to cover for JP with a prime target of tackles around the key ruck area then it is difficult to be critical as he is fullfilling his assigned role in the side.

Macca said that when he took over there were no clearly defined roles for each player and so it was all a bit of a mess. It took some time for the team to settle into their individual specific duties, however once this happened the improvement was plain for all to see. These individual roles seemed to have got lost in the Bluey era as was evidenced in the performances last season.

He is good enough in defence, and clearly does a job. He isn't a JP type player, but it is impossible to have a team full of Them. Kirke is what he is steady and good squad player and does his job without any fuss. Also seems happy with his lot and doesn't cause discontent within the squad as cross and burgess seemed to do when asked to carry out a similar role

I'm sure I read this somewhere else. Have you not just copied and pasted ? ( again )

No I didn't I sat and typed it. Bit annoyed now if I could have just copied and pasted!



To be fair I am not a kirkette or mmmmwar??? But he is what he is, wouldn't have given him a new deal if it was up to me, but it's not

To quote Aristotle, "The whole is greater than the sum of it's parts". I think that just about sums the kirke situation up. Many people,including myself, often wonder what kirke adds to the team. As stated previously he very rarely coughs the ball up, he obviously adapts well to many different team structures, and he maybe does more of an efficient tackling stint than maybe many of us realise. It speaks volumes that kirke has kept many players out of Grand final teams under different coaches. Tony smith, Brian Mclennan and now Brian Mcdermott obviously see something in kirke that makes him the favoured option for the biggest games. With four grand Final wins in five years i ain't gonna question kirkes inclusion when we need to win the biggest matches.

Here's a crazy thought. Perhaps whilst Kirke is on the field giving Peacock a rest he can actually DO SOMETHING. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Maybe then, he would be more effective and his minutes on the pitch would increase, thus keeping JP even fresher. Might also give Kirke a role other than a tachograph. Might also enhance Kirke's career. Sums up his lack of heart that he sees that as his role and accepts it. You think JP would accept such limitations?

Nor do I get this nonsense that because he makes a few tackles he's excused from taking the ball in. As much as I like the sport, this is not American Football and Rugby League players are required to do both tackling and carries.

Tackle counts are sometimes misleading. If the defence runs at your channel a lot, you'll make a lot of tackles. If they don't, you won't. Hit ups is one stat that is what it is and he doesn't make any.

In the GF he made 1 whilst the game was in the balance, from a kick off so not even by choice.

He's soft, there's no other way of dressing it up. Looks like tarzan, plays like Jane.

What if they don't run at your channel, but you still end up with a high tackle count?

Ideally Gary Hetherington would have a team of top surgeons in over the close season to oversee a heart transplant for Kirke thus swapping his, the size of an orange pip, for one the size of a lion. If that unlikely event doesn't take place you might have to put up with a 5th winners ring for kirke next season. Alternatively the signings of Griffin and Moore mean kirke may have to stock up on Duraglit while he sits in the stand polishing his rings.

Or the competition for places will inspire him and bring out the desired improvements.

Then you're an idiot for leaving gaps in the defensive line or a hard working genius who covers for his lazy team mates a lot.

One of the times I re-watched the GF, I paid specific attention to Kirke whilst he was on, especially after something Gotcha said about someone highly regarded in the game saying that people didn't want to run at Kirke.

Whilst I don't think he hurts anyone particularly in defence, what I saw was that he was controlling the ball/torso of the tackled player, and keeping him upright & away from the floor. May not sound much to the uneducated amongst you, but actually, in a big game, and against St Helens especially, if you can slow the tackle / PTB down sufficiently, and prevent them getting a quick play the ball, and a roll on, then you give yourself a pretty good chance.

I saw Kikre do this when he was first man in, as well as when he joined in as second / third / forth man in the tackle.

I would love to see him take the ball in more, but clearly McDermott & heatherington (along with McClennan and Smith) are happy with his ball work, whilst he is steadying the defence up so well.

Also, whilst we are not American football, where people only have 1 role, people should definitely play to their strengths, as well as play to the game plan, given by the coach, or do people on here think they know how to win major honours better than those paid to do it?

Are you softening?

The only way I can see Kirke being valuable to the team is if he is cheap, but with 4 GF rings to his name, and a number of contracts for Leeds, I don't expect him to be cheap. He won't be the most expensive prop on the books, probably not even top 4, but I suspect given his longevity at Leeds his financial reward is greater than his impact on the field.

Last season he was taking up a spot that could have been used on a promising younger player, next season with the signing of Griffin, I suspect that will no longer be the case.

Generally, people on here know nothing. On the other hand, I know everything.

Yes. Got any blue pills?

And yet when I mentioned Buderus's high salary in conjunction with criticism you said performance on the field was all that mattered and salary was irrelevant.

So, which is it? Is salary relative to the value a player offers or not?

[url=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/im4iknoweverything.jpg/[/url