Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:31 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Why you lying tho?
ill just point out again, we conceded fewer points in the first half of the season than the second.

Where's the lie? The debate has been about the first half of the season, I provided the numbers for the first half of the season. We didn't concede fewer points in the first half of the season.

Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:46 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Where's the lie? The debate has been about the first half of the season, I provided the numbers for the first half of the season. We didn't concede fewer points in the first half of the season.

sweetheart, none of those numbers refer to the first half of anything. How has your own post managed to confuse you so much?

Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 6:04 pm  

Looks like printers getting sucked into the proverbial black hole of a smokey quote-athon.

Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 6:38 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

sweetheart, none of those numbers refer to the first half of anything. How has your own post managed to confuse you so much?

Last time I checked there was 30 league games in the season and 16 games in is pretty near as dammit the halfway mark.

Let's be honest we can all see through why you're defending the defence. It all goes back to the thread last week about the hooking position and people pointing out the obvious problems it causes in defence when we don't have a proper hooker and you being so desperate to argue it because you wouldn't hear anything bad said about Rob Burrow causing us issues in defence. It's so transparent because in your criticism on here about the attack you only pinpoint Lilley and Sutcliffe for blame, even though no one has made more starts this year in the 'spine' positions of 6,7 & 9 as Burrow yet you're very quiet of apportioning any blame on your favourite player.

So go on, carry on making a fool of yourself and looking like you've got little to zero actual RL knowledge just because you're desperate to defend Burrow.

Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 6:57 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Last time I checked there was 30 league games in the season and 16 games in is pretty near as dammit the halfway mark.

That is wonderful.

Let's be honest we can all see through why you're defending the defence. It all goes back to the thread last week about the hooking position and people pointing out the obvious problems it causes in defence when we don't have a proper hooker and you being so desperate to argue it because you wouldn't hear anything bad said about Rob Burrow causing us issues in defence. It's so transparent because in your criticism on here about the attack you only pinpoint Lilley and Sutcliffe for blame, even though no one has made more starts this year in the 'spine' positions of 6,7 & 9 as Burrow yet you're very quiet of apportioning any blame on your favourite player.

So go on, carry on making a fool of yourself and looking like you've got little to zero actual RL knowledge just because you're desperate to defend Burrow.

Why you lying again? I wouldn't single out Lilley and Sutcliffe to blame for our attacking problems. Nor have I.

and the reason I have 'defended our defence' as 'not that bad' is because...well... it hasn't been that bad. ill point out once again, our defence has conceded 99points more than a treble winning side, it has conceded less than Cas, only 50 more than Saints, our offence has scored 354 points fewer than last year, it has gone from the best attack in the league by a distance, to the worst, it has scored more than no-one.

That our offence has been atrocious whilst our defence has been merely 'not too bad' is not an argument in favour or against our 2nd Top Metre making, 2nd top tackle busting, top clean breaking, top try assisting hooker Rob Burrow.

Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 7:28 pm  

Rather than rely on statistics to build an argument, I prefer to rely on my own eyes and brain. On the occasions that I've watched Leeds this year, they have been powderpuff in defence and clueless in attack. The combination of both items have resulted in our league position. It's easier to fix up defence than attack, but largely we've failed to do this to an acceptable level, so the pressure on the failing attack grew with each passing game.

Without major improvements in both areas next season, likely needing new personnel, we will continue to struggle.

All this against the backdrop of the poorest quality SL in recent years.

Lots of work to do is my synopsis, and I don't need the stats to come to this conclusion.

Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 7:41 pm  

batleyrhino wrote:

Rather than rely on statistics to build an argument, I prefer to rely on my own eyes and brain. On the occasions that I've watched Leeds this year, they have been powderpuff in defence and clueless in attack. The combination of both items have resulted in our league position. It's easier to fix up defence than attack, but largely we've failed to do this to an acceptable level, so the pressure on the failing attack grew with each passing game.

Without major improvements in both areas next season, likely needing new personnel, we will continue to struggle.

All this against the backdrop of the poorest quality SL in recent years.

Lots of work to do is my synopsis, and I don't need the stats to come to this conclusion.

Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 7:49 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Why you lying again? I wouldn't single out Lilley and Sutcliffe to blame for our attacking problems. Nor have I.

Apart from this....

SmokeyTA wrote:

whilst we had no problem marching down the field but were struggling to get over the line because Lilley and Sutcliffe (who werent our first choice half pairing) arent adept at putting players through those holes on the line and simply dont have the consistent short and long kicking game needed to play that kind of grinding rugby.

Only seeing two of our pivots highlighted for our struggles to score points

SmokeyTA wrote:

and the reason I have 'defended our defence' as 'not that bad' is because...well... it hasn't been that bad. ill point out once again, our defence has conceded 99points more than a treble winning side, it has conceded less than Cas, only 50 more than Saints, our offence has scored 354 points fewer than last year

True it has done over the course of the 23 rounds of the regular season......however we were all discussing the the first half of the year.

Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 8:07 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Apart from this....

Only seeing two of our pivots highlighted for our struggles to score points

Why you lying again?

SmokeyTA wrote:

As i have said before, in general our defence hasnt been that bad, our attack has had problems, probably more than is acceptable but is it down to a 19 year old halfback playing more games than he could have expected? Losing our MoS fullback to injury and then completely and moving a new player there? Having only 1 player in our first choice back line play 20+games doesnt really help anyone play any sort of planned rugby, having your only experienced half in and out of the side isnt going to help.

With the players we had out there at times, i'm not surprised we didnt know what we were doing

True it has done over the course of the 23 rounds of the regular season......however we were all discussing the the first half of the year.

why you lying again?

ThePrinter wrote:

The total points conceded is helped massively by the final 7 games of the regular season (23 Rounds). We averaged just 14.8 in those 7 games, in the opening 16 rounds the figure was 29.5 (which if we carried on at that rate we would've conceded over 200 points more than 2015). Last year we conceded on average 20.5 during the opening 23 rounds.

So posters saying the defence was poor during the first half of the year does actually stand up with figures, as well as being plainly obvious just by watching what was happening on the pitch.

Re: McDermott : Thu Sep 15, 2016 8:25 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

our defence has conceded 99points more than a treble winning side

....so enough to lose 99 more games than last year

SmokeyTA wrote:

only 50 more than Saints.

....so enough to lose 50 more games than Saints

SmokeyTA wrote:

our offence has scored 354 points fewer than last year

....so enough to win more games than last year

SmokeyTA wrote:

That our offence has been atrocious whilst our defence has been merely 'not too bad' is not an argument in favour or against our 2nd Top Metre making, 2nd top tackle busting, top clean breaking, top try assisting hooker Rob Burrow.

....oh OK

Your obeisance at the feet of the God OPTA is duly noted