Development hampered by poor coaching post 2006.

How many more threads are we going to have about Jamie Langley

I mean, I think he misses too many games through injury, doesn't display any ball playing skills anymore etc etc. But the fact is we cannot just 'get rid'. If he is indeed on £150K then that is what it would cost, per year, to 'get rid' - unless another club were willing to take him. And with his injury record who would do that?

So that's £150K off the salary cap, plus the cost of replacing him with someone else. So that's basically going to be about £250K of the cap for something that might not even improve things. Hardly a sensible proposition

I do agree with moving him up to the front row though

I think that would be the most sensible option if lynchy does actually leave us.
suspect we may find lynch leaving and a potential replacement (maybe just squad numbers announced tommorow)

superleague apearances: 2008 23 (12th in SL tackle table with 676), 2009 25 (third in SL tackle table with 893), 2010 19 not in top 25 with 638 tackles but cannot have been far off and 2011 13. metres gained per match 91 94 133 76. last season he was still performing on the pitch, this season the stats have definitely dipped so the injuries have affected his on field performance, other than offloads per game have doubled this season (Potter stated in a Bullseye he wanted Jamie to do more) compared to the three previous seasons 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.6. I would not run at this dead donkey with a rugby ball as i think I would be a dead donkey myself. I think other postings show a more constructive approach to his problems this season, ie one more year to prove his fitness, or move him forward in the pack where prop seems to be the most popular option.

Have you ever known anybody so utterly obsessed with statistics?

You don't like statistics that disprove your points, perhaps?

Like what?

I'm not opposed to stats by any means. They just don't always tell the whole picture and can't be fully relied on.

And you could have said that, instead you had a disparaging swipe at the poster. Nice.

Personally I think Langley has plenty to offer the club and it'd be wrong for us to try and offload him.

That said, is there anyone else at the club who's been here long enough to be eligible for the £50k subsidy? Hypothetically if that £50k passed on to Sykes would he be better value (being able to cover 3-4 positions) than Langley?

No he wouldn't. Langley is equaly capable of covering 3/4 positions imo. LF/SR/PROP/HOOKER, Maybe centre at a push.

I felt sick reading that part.

At least they provide some factual basis for a discussion rather than some whimsy of an opinion plucked out of thin air. statistics can be interpreted in different ways and there can be discussion about that which is the whole purpose of such a site as this. I presented those statistics in direct response to a question from the poster as to how many games Jamie had played. Clearly if that person was asking such a question they had not done any research themselves to confirm their opinion and so to then say that Jamie cannot tackle when they did not even know how many games he played, they cannot know anything about Jamies performance. So I am sorry that I presented such awkward facts such as his tackles rate, but I also pointed to sensible constructive comments that other posters made. Interestingly in your next year starting 17 you moved Jamie from LF forwards in the pack, I cant quite remember whether 2nd row or prop, so you disagree with the brainless poster too, and yet your are defending him. Or rather taking the opportunity to have a rant at me. The topic was a repeat of one a few weeks ago in which I and a number of other posters said the same things as we said this time, so if you dont want statistics stop coming up with the same thoughtless whimsical comments.

Don't be silly, the days when Langley could play out in the backs have long gone

And I wouldn't ever want to see at hooker these days either

For me, nowadays, he looks like a hard working, hard tackling prop forward - or second row at a push

Exactly Paul.

Where have I disagreed with anybody or defended anybody about Langley and his stats? Are you seeing things, or just making them up? Still, you can't make stats up can you?

Not saying he'd be good at either. Just that at a push he could cover there. Hell, Paul Sykes is a back and his days of playing there have also long gone.

A prop? Jamie Langley is not!

My point wasn't really about Sykes but that Langley might not be the only person in the squad (or even past players now at other clubs) that we could use the £50k subsidy on.

IIRC the 50k is only applicable to players with 10 years continuous service to the club. I think Kopczak might actually be the next who this would apply to.

Lynch? He's on 7 years I think.

Correct. think kopczak is probably just ahead of lynch in line to receive it due to his time in academy, though not 100% sure.

Kopz told us at the last game of the season he is contracted until 2012 and that final year will be his 10th at the club and subsequently his testimonial year

He is now a ''average joe'' he started off pretty well had buckets of potential, sadly never materialised. Injuries have sadly taken toll.

Bulls4champions2010 here we are. This is what you are defending by saying that statistics are irrelevant. if bullsfab had spent 10 seconds to look at the number of games Jamie has played over the last three years, and the number of tackles and his missed tackle % of total tackles, he would not have wasted everybodies time with such a crass comment. Nothing is black and white, so he is not totally wrong, but its analysis of the stats that show the truth. This season yes, the data shows that the persistent injuries (or is it one injury and he has put an unfit body on the pitch and on the line for the team) he has had have affected his performance on the pitch as well, but it is still pretty good performance compared to a number of other players. Last season and the season before, sorry, Bullsfab is talking nonsense. Or is my interpretation of the data wrong?

Yet I haven't actually defended anybody or anything. FWIW, I actually really like Langley and don't need statistics to tell me he's a good player or worthy of his place in the side.

I'm not really sure what you are getting at, and to be honest, I don't think you are.