Langley is not being targeted by Saints why would saints want to sign him and he's good in defence but in attack he couldn't make a gap if he tried and he is not exactly world class.

Who is World class at saints apart from Jammer. Did you not watch the Wakefield home game?

Very few world class players in SL, depending on what you call world class.

Nero= Been 1 of our best all season & deserves an extension

Langley=Not good enough for back row,either move him upto prop or get shut.

Utter Tripe.

Not good enough going forward as a prop, although he does make some consistent metres. Take Langley out of our pack and we'll severely miss his absence in defence.

Well he certainly aint good enough going forward for the back row tripe or not

If he makes metres, then he has good go forward. The stats are there, he makes as much ground as any other second rower in the comp, therefore he is clearly good at getting us to 'go forward'.

Some people just do not appreciate hard workers.

I appreciate hard workers more than anyone & am not slagging Langley, but some people read too much into stats

Langley's a grafter, the reason he has so many metres is because he carries the ball more than most other backrowers. His metres per carry probably aren't as good as a lot of them, but who cares. He works his off for the team. on top of that, in defence he is the man that the rest of the defensive line follow. Take that man away, and you'll give up lots of extra metres.

That's because they are important. Why do you think clubs employ statisticians to measure what players do and do not do?

Jamie Langley's job in our team, clearly is to get us going forward and to defend like a trooper, and he is very good at the job that he does.

I agree some stats are important ie metres per carry & in that respect Langley is not good enough for the back row IMO

But he's made more metres than most ther back rowers in Super League, and he's also carried the ball more times than most. His metres per carry are no different to many other top SL SR's, they are all around the 6/7 metre P/C mark.

So clearly, he makes as much ground per carry as other SR's and he also carries the ball more than most, and tackles more than most.

But yeah, you're entitled to whatever opinion you like, nothing wrong with that.

It's too much to expect for him to listen to an argument which has statistics to back it up.

I dont think it's so much that, I just think people don't see Langley throwing the ball about and running in for tries here there and everywhere, then they automatically think he's a poor attacking player, when that's clearly not the case.

Stats lie.

Extreme example. If a player makes 3 carries every single set, he's going to make a lot of yards. He could catch the ball and run to the first defender, making no yards at all after hitting that defender, and yet he would still make yards from where he caught the ball.

Someone making a lot of yards doesn't necessarily mean that he does well with the ball. It may simply mean he takes more carries than other players.


I'm not saying if this relates to Langley or not, but there is always an instance when stats don't tell the full story.


In my personal experience this year, with the exception of two games, I've felt Langley doesn't do enough with the ball. He catches it and hits the defender, then goes down. He hardly ever makes yards after the impact and hardly ever offloads. When he does, he shows what a quality player he really can be (I think it was the Wakefield home game that illustrated it perfectly). However he doesn't do it nearly enough for me.

Having said that, I'd want him in the team purely for his defensive contribution, which is always outstanding.

thinkk langley is a good 2nd rower or prop but defo not a loose forward as doesnt create enuff .

dont think bulls have had a decent ball playing loose forward since mike forshaw

Beaver's been doing a good job these past few games.

I wouldn't say Forshaw was a ball player. He was a super worker, but was always more of a workhorse than he was creative.

I'd say the last ball playing loose we had was Brad Mackay.

Stats don't lie, they tell people what has been done, that's why they are recorded and used. They may not tell the whole picture all of the time, but they are usually a pretty relaible indication of what has happened most of the time and that's why sports teams use them.

I agree with you that a player with high metres and high carries doesnt mean that he does well with the ball, but it does mean that he makes lots of yards going forward, they are there and recorded, wether he caught the ball 5 yards behind the ruck, or half a yard behind the ruck(which is usually the case in Super League) it doesn't matter, he's made metres going forward, and as players usally take the ball on the advantage line, that usually means 6 or 7 metres(average) that the team has gone forward.

I disagree, I think Langley does make yards after impact, but I do agree that he doesn't offer an offload game, and I agree again, that when he does offer that, he shows that he can provide that little bit of extra quality that seperates the best from the rest.

For me, the yardage and amount of carries Langley offers makes him a good attacking player add to the outstanding defence that he offers and you have got a very good player for us.

yes he was more of a worker but with that excellent zig zagging run of his - I suppose you could count Henry Paul as well after he saw off Brad!

I should have phrased it better. That is correct, they don't necessarily lie as it is a fact, not an opinion. But they do definitely give a clouded judgement as they don't tell everything. The best example I always find is try scoring. Even the worst winger in the world could score quite a few tries if he's playing outside a great centre. However if a winger scores 20 tries in a season, he's immediately hailed as excellent. In actual fact, it may just mean the players inside him have done all the word and he's simply caught the ball and put it down 20 times. Again, I appreciate it's an extreme example, but that's usually the best way to illustrate a point.






Yes it does. Again it's a case of stats not telling the whole story. Langley makes loads of yards, fact. You can't argue with that and anyone who tries to is not looking at cold hard facts. My issue with Jamie is very much what he does with the ball at the tackle. If he varied his game more, he'd be a massively dangerous player. As it is, because of the complete lack of offloads, teams can put 2 or 3 players in to tackle him every time without fear of leaving themselves open. I'd love to see a stat that showed what happened when he DOES offload, as I'm pretty sure the times he has, we've ended up making loads of metres or even scoring. I'm sure that's because teams just don't expect it from him due to the rarity of the act.




I think that's an "agree to disagree" area, as I really haven't seen him do it much at all. Although when you have players like Lynch out there who does it almost every single carry, perhaps I'm judging Langley by too high standards.






Henry never played nearly as much 13 as he should have imo. He would have been superb there for us, but he never really good more than the odd game there until he went to Quins.

Same, Forshaw wasn't a ball handler, he got through the graft more than anything, he was certainley no Sculthorpe or Sinfield when it came to handling the ball.

Whys that then ?

I have listened and wasn't aware Langley was amongst the highest metres per carry in SL for a back rower.

I just don't think he does enough going forward for a back rower.

That's why. The stats prove that he does alot of work, more than most in SL.

The whys that was why wouldn't i listen.

No argument with his work rate its the quality of it i think is in question

Work rate's not really about quality, it's about quantity, hence the term workhorse really. He does offer some quality going forwards some of the time aswell.