Re: Segayaro : Fri Sep 09, 2016 6:49 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Perhaps you have mis-attributed the argument that big players couldnt tackle back to me?

Or you might be serious about arguing Cunningham was a noted speedster at hooker.

Must have missed when I did that.
Just for the record, I'm not arguing with you. You haven't posted a single thing worthy of arguing with.

Re: Segayaro : Fri Sep 09, 2016 6:49 pm  

For the last time I'm not saying Burrow hasn't been a great servant to Leeds. I am not saying he hasn't played a great part in our success. I am not saying that he does not still bring something to our team.

I am saying that the team would be weaker and probably less successful if we relied on Burrow to play every minute of every game at hooker over the course of a season.

This is clearly something the powers that be at the club agree with as they have always carried at least one specialist hooker. I am going to leave it at that, because I don't really know how much simpler I can make it.

Re: Segayaro : Fri Sep 09, 2016 7:00 pm  

DHM wrote:

Must have missed when I did that.
Just for the record, I'm not arguing with you. You haven't posted a single thing worthy of arguing with.

Oh well, as long as the record is straight, it seems very important.

Re: Segayaro : Fri Sep 09, 2016 7:02 pm  

Barrie's Glass Eye wrote:

For the last time I'm not saying Burrow hasn't been a great servant to Leeds. I am not saying he hasn't played a great part in our success. I am not saying that he does not still bring something to our team.

I am saying that the team would be weaker and probably less successful if we relied on Burrow to play every minute of every game at hooker over the course of a season.

This is clearly something the powers that be at the club agree with as they have always carried at least one specialist hooker. I am going to leave it at that, because I don't really know how much simpler I can make it.

If by 'specialist hooker' you mean someone other than Burrow, you could make it a little simpler by not contradicting yourself. Your last post readily admitted that 'the powers that be' havent always gone with a 'specialist hooker'

Re: Segayaro : Fri Sep 09, 2016 9:04 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

If by 'specialist hooker' you mean someone other than Burrow, you could make it a little simpler by not contradicting yourself. Your last post readily admitted that 'the powers that be' havent always gone with a 'specialist hooker'

Actually, just checked 2013 we had McShane, so every year we have had a specialist hooker to work alongside Burrow, the non specialist who is capable of covering dummy half.

Again if you believe that going with Burrow at hooker all game every game then that's fine, clearly I nor anyone else is going to change your mind.

Thankfully as I said, the coaching staff don't see it that way. Genuinely gonna leave it at that this time.

Re: Segayaro : Fri Sep 09, 2016 9:11 pm  

Belting news. AJC wrote: The news we've been waiting for! http://www.therhinos.co.uk/news/james-s ... 9JJPEnTWBY

Belting news. AJC wrote: The news we've been waiting for! http://www.therhinos.co.uk/news/james-s ... 9JJPEnTWBY

Re: Segayaro : Fri Sep 09, 2016 9:33 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

yes. We were in the position to win the treble, and in fact did win the treble with Burrow playing the majority of games at hooker .

How many of those 30 league games did Burrow START at hooker? Because that's the question, STARTING. The answer is 2. A lot of games when he was on the bench he didn't even get subbed on until the 2nd half (didn't get on until as late as the 70th min away to Cas) and we didn't always take Aiton off when we brought Burrow on.

Re: Segayaro : Sat Sep 10, 2016 8:12 am  

ThePrinter wrote:

How many of those 30 league games did Burrow START at hooker? Because that's the question, STARTING. The answer is 2. A lot of games when he was on the bench he didn't even get subbed on until the 2nd half (didn't get on until as late as the 70th min away to Cas) and we didn't always take Aiton off when we brought Burrow on.

That number is out, by a bit. He started his last 4 SL games at hooker, firstly, and started twelve of his 30 appearances last year.

Secondly, even if that were true, that help you even less. Aiton started 25 of 36 games last year, that would mean that someone other than Burrow or Aiton started 9 of 36 games at hooker for Leeds last year (11 that he missed minus the 2 that you decided burrow started), thats 25% of our treble winning season that had either a player that wasnt a hooker, or a Robbie Ward at hooker. Remember, your whole point here is the importance of a true specialist hooker to that side yet you also thought that we played a quarter of the season with either no hooker or a championship standard one.

Re: Segayaro : Sat Sep 10, 2016 10:36 am  

Is there a prize for the most childlike bickering thread that I have not been made aware of?

Re: Segayaro : Sat Sep 10, 2016 2:14 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

That number is out, by a bit. He started his last 4 SL games at hooker, firstly, and started twelve of his 30 appearances last year.

Secondly, even if that were true, that help you even less. Aiton started 25 of 36 games last year, that would mean that someone other than Burrow or Aiton started 9 of 36 games at hooker for Leeds last year (11 that he missed minus the 2 that you decided burrow started), thats 25% of our treble winning season that had either a player that wasnt a hooker, or a Robbie Ward at hooker. Remember, your whole point here is the importance of a true specialist hooker to that side yet you also thought that we played a quarter of the season with either no hooker or a championship standard one.

We were talking about the league season only (LLS) not playoffs.

Aiton - 23
Cuthbertson - 3
Burrow - 2
Lilley - 1
R.Ward - 1

Total - 30

Aiton/R.Ward - w17 d1 l6
Burrow/Lilley/Cuthbertson - w2 l4