assuming a 100% conversion rate (unlikely I know) we'd have got an extra 5 points which would have been enough for a playoff place. Last year wasnt best example tbh as a lot of scores in 2nd half tended to be fairly heavy losses. Seem to remember a lot more close games previous year or two.

If all of the above kickers had 100% the results would be:

Leeds 20-26 Bradford = 2 points
Bradford 26-26 Warrington = extra time
Castleford 28-28 Bradford = 1 point
Bradford 24-28 Hull FC = no difference
Bradford 30-30 Salford = 1 point
Bradford 24-24 catalans = 1 point

So by using the above we would have four extra points (one from the 20-20 draw has already been counted) and would move up the Super League from 10th (19pts) to 9th (23pts) behind the Crusaders in 8th (24pts).

That saying had Sykes kicked 100% in the Warrington cup game then it would have been extra time and who knows what would/could have happend.

All IF's and Maybes I'm afraid.

forgot wire was the cup game

Yeah it still wouldn't have been enough to make the playoffs but I can categorically say that when I post the 2009 season tomorrow we would have made the playoffs.

your forgetting if we'd drawn with catalans they'd have dropped a point and we'd both have finished on 23pts with it going to goal difference. we'd have just edged that through the extra goals.

Here are the close games from the 2009 season.

Bradford 13-13 Hull KR
Bradford 12-16 Huddersfield
Castleford 28-26 Bradford
Catalans 40-38 Bradford (Challenge Cup)
Wakefield 24-22 Bradford
Bradford 24-30 Celtic
Salford 18-10 Bradford
Bradford 14-20 Wigan
Bradford 38-40 Castleford
Bradford 14-22 Harlequins

With a bit more composure we could have been level at the top with Leeds who finished just 17 points in front as all these narrow defeats saw us miss out on the playoffs by just the sole point.

Out of that list I find the away cup game at Catalans the hardest to take in. I just can't get over how we could lose a 26-0 lead?

if we wanted to assume we were getting 100% kick rates, for fairness shouldn't we do the same for the opposition? I don't think much would have changed at all if we did.

Good point well made, but I think the point in question is we missed a HELL of alot of goals in 2009, and 2010 in particular. Those close games could have shifted with an out and out goal kicker, something every team probably had in SL over those two years and we didn't.

agreed, we certainly missed Mr. Deacon in that respect.

Definitely.

Whatever people thought of the rest of his game, I think we all took his goalkicking for granted a little and you don't tend to realise just how important that was until he's gone.

I'm not getting into a Deacon argument again but you would have got nowhere near the try line without Orford in the games he played, to be in a position to kick the conversion in the first place.

absolutely but we had nobody to make the benefit better. 3 converted tries against 3 non converted tries gives you that bit more breathing space and also puts a bit more pressure on the team without a decent goal kicker. scoring an extra couple of tries against the better teams with better defences makes a hard job unnecessarily harder.

wasnt he here for the 2009 season when our kicking seemed particularly bad, or did he miss a lot through injury?

In 2009, Deacon kicked 86 from 109 in Superleague. At 78.9% that's probably a little off his best, but by no means bad.

In 2010 in Superleague, Sykes kicked 37 from 51 (72.5%) and Orford kicked 31 from 45 (68.9%)

As Wigan found, to their cost.

Oh hang on . . .