It's a valid point mate, but a point that backs up everything that others are saying. It can't work both ways. It can't be said that injuries happen tough, then say well he only made the yards because he wasn't injured.



The fact is that others have gone backwards in their metre making, and Peacock has increased his by more than double over two seasons. Some players are most definitely work shy and leave it to the man who's importance is fundamental to this side. Without him, on the evidence of the last two seasons, that side would be struggling.

Be carefull you will be seen as a moaner and forever critical of the coach and the players who have won a zillion GF rings between them.

Some people need to stop living in the past and look to the future and how we can stay at the top and win more finals in an entertaining manner.

This post is typical of why I respect Rhinoms' posts the best. He is undoubtedly an incontrovertible loyal true supporter, but has the capacity to also be insightful and not be afraid to highlight problems.

Some on here seem to delight in suggesting everything in the garden is rosey and the club should be devoid of any criticism. ...largely because of PAST achievements.

For me we have enough grunt and ability in our forward pack. The issue is likely to be one of how well conditioned they are.



I think the concerns are valid. At the same time if we get 3 or 4 of these forwards playing as well as I think they still can, then we have a pack that can compete with anyone. We didn't see that last year for a variety of reasons.



I see grounds for optimism in the expected transition of Singleton into a key part of the pack this year, and in Aiton who I think has been brought in to give energy and structure in defence more than game management in attack. Hopefully Ward can also have more input this year, and Bailey and JJB will be looking for big years I think. Clarkson stalled a bit last year IMO, but I think there's still potential there. Needs to pick his lines better among other things.



So, my optimism is not blind. It's cautious optimism. There are a lot of 'ifs' in there. But that would be the case if we'd brought in 2 or 3 new faces as well.



Longer term, we still need to recruit and promote. To be honest #7 is the position I am most concerned about replacing when the Golden Generation (TM) call it a day. There are more good forwards than good half backs knocking around.

The stats tell a different story, and indeed with Peacock the exception the rest are not producing what they were previously.







Wouldn't disagree with that at all. Although the evidence of the last couple of seasons would say you probably have to be optimistic.







This totally agree with. Although the evidence would point to the situation that if Peacock, Bailey, Kirke, and Kylie are all fit and available, that Singleton will miss out.



Interesting your point on Clarkson. I blame this coach in regressing this player. However, the stats would show that he actually had the equivalent season of Delaney last year in most areas.









I agree with this. The issue with the forwards though is that as a club we haven't moved to pick up these good forwards, despite evidence showing we have a glaring need to. I still also think that six as well as seven is not sorted.

For me I think we have a good squad and one that can compete. My concern is that they will not be best utilised.



For me, we need to get the bets out of Peacock, and I would say limit his involvement so that he is more effective. Bailey & Kirke need to step up here.

Singleton should become a first team player this year. he should take some of the load as he looks very keen.



We now have more competition in the halves, with Burrow effectively free'd up. My preference would be Burrow & Sinfield, as it provides XFactor and organisation. We have Sutcliffe and McGuire fighting to make the 13.



With Ward back, we have more back row options, which means that the likes of JJB and Delaney should not be overworked, and played injured.



In short, I think we have the squad to compete, but it needs the coach to use it correctly.

Last year's stats. My cautious optimism is based on a belief that there are, and can be, no stats for that they are still capable of it, or something like it.









I like being optimistic. Being a pessimist is depressing.











Again, that was last season. I am basing this on hope (I don't think there is any actual evidence of the coach's selection plans for 2014) that having been eased into 1st grade last year he'll be in contention from the start this year. Time will tell.







Those stats surprise me a bit, he doesn't catch the eye so much. My eye, anyway. But I still think there's a very good player in there. I hope to really see it this year.







Not sorted, but I still think Sutcliffe might grow into the role, and they do seem to have given Hardaker some consideraton in the halves. Ward will also make a good pivot. My worry is that Sutcliffe and Ward might end up a bit similar in style (although I could equally see Sutcliffe turning into a centre). But I see options for that type of player. A bona fide scrum half is what I cna't see on the horizon. There aren't actually may of them around in the league full stop, and that is a problem.



We can still buy a big forward, becasue there are plenty out there, and you can even pick a good one up from the Championship (Hill and Walmsley are examples - where you could reasonably argue we've missed out, but they suggest there may be more coal in the seam).

I do apologise for that, only had the time to reply to Rhinoms whose message was first and was planning to get to yours when I had time to do a full and proper response,







I do look at stats in detail, here's some taking into account a massive factor of amount of games played.



LEULUAI

Games Played - 2013 (22) 2012 (29)

Metres (Average Per Game) - 1860 (84.5) 2005 (69.1)

Tackles - 416 (18.9) 449 (15.4)



BAILEY

Games Played - 2013 (14) 2012 (22)

Metres - 750 (53.6) 1034 (47)

Tackles - 352 (25.1) 425 (19.3)



DELANEY

Games Played - 2013 (1icon_cool.gif 2012 (29)

Metres - 1480 (82.2) 2201 (75.9)

Tackles - 527 (29.3) 769 (26.5)



CLARKSON

Games Played - 2013 (23) 2012 (23)

Metres - 1365 (59.3) 843 (36.7)

Tackles - 575 (25) 450 (19.6)



KIRKE

Games Played - 2013 (29) 2012 (21)

Metres - 1474 (50.9) 1033 (49.2)

Tackles - 583 (20.1) 294 (14)



JJB

Games Played - 2013 (22) 2012 (20)

Metres - 1867 (84.9) 1793 (89.6)

Tackles - 681 (30.9) 531 (26.6)



...................................



All six post a healthy increase in number of tackles made per game. 5 of the 6 made increases in metres made per game. JJB the only one to do less but still totals the highest average amongst the rest of the forwards after Peacock and he missed some of our easier games like Salford, London, Widnes, Wakey x 2 which would've probably seen him overhaul his 2012 average.



An almost entire clean sweep of improvement from 2012 by the whole forwards in the two big departments, so maybe criticism of them going downhill in 2013 has been incorrect.



(Haven't done Ablett as he'd ended up playing too many games at centre in both years).



You can look at other teams and say its good that they have a more even spread across their forwards. You can also say they're extremely lacking in their backs making metres for them too. We had Hall, Hardaker and Burrow all post 3,000+ metres in 2013. Between Warrington and Saints they didn't have a single back who made more than 2,600+ and it can be easily flipped to say they actually have an over reliance on their forwards.

Actually what they highlight is that in the case of Kylie, Bailey and Delaney, they are not fit enough and capable enough of doing the same amount of game time they did previously. On the plus side of that you get more metres per carry, and as you are reading it more tackles per game.



On the downside of that of course is that in their absence/less work, someone else is having to do it, which is really resting on one man, Peacock. Which of course then comes back to if Peacock was injured, where is that work load going to come from, considering it is a massive chasm difference to those other players?



Therefore we are back to there is concerns about the pack, and with regards that you can see why people are posting these concerns.



I also made the point, which you quoted, about the additional yardage achieved by the switch of Hardaker.

THAT is what you think those stats really highlight???



It can't possibly just be the obvious and logical view that they highlight improvements in yardage and tackling?



Bailey played 8 games less, he missed 9 with a broken thumb, not exactly a massive question mark over his overall fitness to brake a thumb in RL.



Leuluai, played 23 SL games in 2010, was up to 29 in 2012, dipped down to 22 in 2013. Their's no pattern to the amount of games he's played that can be attributed to him not being fit and/or capable. He picked up an injury, it happens.



Again Delaney, he went from 22 in 2011, up to 29 in 2012, down to 18



What the games played figures shows is that sometimes you can have an injury hit year, sometimes you can get through it ok.



As for more metres per carry, all 6 actually slightly decreased in the department, they ended up with more metres per game by taking more carries in and increasing their workload.



Carries per game.....



JJB = 14.1 (2013) - 12.2 (2012)

LEULUAI = 11.6 - 8.9

DELANEY = 12.3 - 11.2

CLARKSON = 10.3 - 6.3

BAILEY = 9.1 - 7.5

KIRKE = 7.1 - 6.6



So that's Metres made, tackles, and carries they all improved on. Increased workload in both attack and defence.



So the thought that Peacock was the only real one to increase his workload whilst others sat back and let him isn't on the money.

Well thanks guys for that super input. Seen as I'm the one debating with Rhinoms I can only presume you both mean me as the 'living in the past, rose coloured glasses, harping on about the GF successes' fan.



Funny because I've mentioned many times of my dislike of Burrow starting at hooker, the none use (or almost none use of subs), and how we don't use our forwards well in the final 20m, to name but a few.



Whilst you like to make it out to be that anybody who criticises this club will be attacked upon those who won't hear no bad spoke of the Rhinos.......it's actually the other way round. If you don't agree with those that think things are wrong and you dare speak optimistically and positive about the club then you find yourself fighting several. Just look at this thread.....Me vs Gotcha, Rhinoms, Nantwich, Chapylad.



And why? Because I said the forwards aren't as bad as suggested, if done in blind loyalty then yes I deserve the title of rose tinted supporter, but check the stats I've posted. All forwards improved in key areas in 2013. I don't say things out of blind loyalty, I say them because they hold some weight.



After only 4 rounds of 2013 I made a point of saying that whilst Buderus/Burrow and Lunt/Burrow worked, McShane/Burrow didn't look like working. With a few rounds left with most just going on about it being the forwards that was the problem I pointed to the 6,7,9 and said one has to go realistically. Within 6 or 7 rounds I'd highlighted how Sinfield's tackling numbers were way above his last two years at Stand-Off and how I believed this was impacting on his attacking side. I called it before the 2012 season that Hardaker was only going to be a stopgap at centre and wasn't a long-term solution (in the 2011 GF, just before the Ablett try, Webb makes a break, offloads to Hardaker who instead of simply putting BJB over with a simple pass, grubbers the ball and it's knocked out for a drop-out, goes unremembered by most as we scored straight after but it stuck in my head as crucial evidence that he wasn't a centre). I've been one of the first to come out and say I don't see a 6 in Sutcliffe at the moment and he looks more like a centre. Maybe I'll be wrong but it certainly isn't a rose tinted view. I agreed with many that we should've given Amor a chance......we haven't, he's gone elsewhere, I move onwards and don't keep whining about past departures (whose the ones living in the past when they keep bringing up the likes of Amor, Lunt, Baldwinson etc. moving on?)

Relax Printer. Your entitled to your opinion. I don't think your making a bad a job of trying to stress your view to be honest.



I think your wrong, but time will show that. In the mean time I think others also have the right to give their opinion also.