Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

07/04/13 - Leeds Rhinos v Warrington Wolves - KO 6.45pm (Sky Sports)


  • Please log in to reply
142 replies to this topic

Poll: Who will win? (15 member(s) have cast votes)

Who will win?

  1. Voted Leeds Rhinos (11 votes [73.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 73.33%

  2. Warrington Wolves (4 votes [26.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.67%

  3. Draw (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#101 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,185 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:06 PM

It seemed to me the breaks helped the metres (which sounds a bit obvious!) the long range tries or breaks down field followed by errors, etc. I'm working from a hazy memory but I'm guessing the the last two tries were Warrington's and almost consolation tries. There is the infamous stats quote and while it seemed competitive, the large error count and early ill discipline did the damage... and missing the half a dozen or so forward passes but that's par for the course at Headingley. If I'm right in thinking most of the Leeds tries came from sustained pressure, whereas three Warrington's came from deep. I'm still undecided if the 3 missed goals mattered too in that sense. I'd agree with your last line, but I think Leeds were a notch or two more than a "little" better, but I don't have the vocabulary to come up with that word!!

i dont think Wire's third try could be classed as a consolation. Even with 15 to go it was an 8 point game. Leeds were under some pressure.

Leeds were better because they made fewer errors and were better disciplined. Their goal line defence was slightly better but then they missed a higher % of tackles so its hard to say their overall defence was better.

Considering the amount of Wire turnovers, Leeds should have been out of sight, yet they were nowhere near good enough to do that, McDermott seemed to be peed off with his teams performance too.

Leeds were better, but the commentary and analysis of this game seems way out.

#102 fieldofclothofgold

fieldofclothofgold
  • Coach
  • 5,729 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:07 PM

Ok, Warrington didn't play at their brilliant best if they did they would have thrashed this mediocre Leeds team.Was it a good game?
but you and I weve been through that and this is not our fate.
So let us so let us not talk falsely now.
The hour is getting late
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

#103 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,130 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:13 PM

i dont think Wire's third try could be classed as a consolation. Even with 15 to go it was an 8 point game. Leeds were under some pressure.

Leeds were better because they made fewer errors and were better disciplined. Their goal line defence was slightly better but then they missed a higher % of tackles so its hard to say their overall defence was better.

Considering the amount of Wire turnovers, Leeds should have been out of sight, yet they were nowhere near good enough to do that, McDermott seemed to be peed off with his teams performance too.

Leeds were better, but the commentary and analysis of this game seems way out.

I'd agree with that, however to me it never felt like a close run thing, however much I'd wished it to be.


On Odsal Top baht 'at.


#104 chuffer

chuffer
  • Coach
  • 3,665 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:15 PM

Seems Wire fans are angrier at the Sky team's commentary than they are their own players' lacklustre effort......which is odd

 

Call a spade a spade ffs, you played ###### - you got beat - get over it



#105 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,185 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:18 PM

Ok, Warrington didn't play at their brilliant best if they did they would have thrashed this mediocre Leeds team.Was it a good game?

if you heard the soundtrack to the game you may understand where I'm coming from. Even after McDermott and Smith had both said how average Leeds were, Clarkes KPIs and summary had shown many areas in Wires favour, Sky cut straight to O'Connor who declared Leeds had been 'exceptional'. Anybody who feels that was an exceptional performance by either team doesnt know much about the game.

As for the game overall, it was ok, there were some great bits of skill and some genuinely class tries from both sides.

As I said in an earlier post Hall was the difference. With an average winger out there they would have had two tries less. As he is there he just made it look easy as he always does.

#106 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,185 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:23 PM

Seems Wire fans are angrier at the Sky team's commentary than they are their own players' lacklustre effort......which is odd

Call a spade a spade ffs, you played ###### - you got beat - get over it

i have commented on the team.

I am challenging lazy analysis like yours. If we put little effort in and played ##### against a team that others have described as 'exceptional' and 'outstanding' then something doesnt add up with the scoreboard.

I wouldnt question effort, id question application and form of key players like Hodgson and Monaghan, our shocking kicking game, and a high handling error count which is often a feature of our game and imho not directly linked to effort.

#107 chuffer

chuffer
  • Coach
  • 3,665 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:31 PM



I wouldnt question effort, id question application and form of key players like Hodgson and Monaghan, our shocking kicking game, and a high handling error count which is often a feature of our game and imho not directly linked to effort.

 

I agree that application was amis.....handling errors/mistakes from the likes of Atkins and Hodgson etc........but the lack of effort I was referring to was just the general lack of spark/aggression (both running the ball in and in defence)....you didn't look switched on (hence the mistakes) but you didn't seem that bothered either (hence the comments on the effort)........just didn't seem like you were playing with heart - am I the only one who could see that?



#108 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,185 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 11:04 PM

I agree that application was amis.....handling errors/mistakes from the likes of Atkins and Hodgson etc........but the lack of effort I was referring to was just the general lack of spark/aggression (both running the ball in and in defence)....you didn't look switched on (hence the mistakes) but you didn't seem that bothered either (hence the comments on the effort)........just didn't seem like you were playing with heart - am I the only one who could see that?

i dunno, you may be right but i think we too often put poor displays down to people not trying and Im not a fan of that.

We were making the hard yards, we were winning plenty of collisions, i think we lost focus on three occasions defensively (two weak marker plays and a shocking tackle from Riley - too common these days).

The issue was errors which as i say we always have those in us - even in games we win, so as a Wire fan we have to accept that.
We didnt get much luck, were playing the champions away and tbh overall, whilst disappointed, I dont think it was quite as bad as some people made out.

A couple of tweaks and there's some good stuff there.

A 5 tries to 4 loss at the home of the Champions is not the hiding many are claiming it is, and from memory it was closer than last year.

#109 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,185 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 11:07 PM

I'd agree with that, however to me it never felt like a close run thing, however much I'd wished it to be.

tbh - even though our form was off, I wouldnt have been overly surprised to see us go over around the 70m mark and force a sudden death game. As it happened we got held up on their line snd we made a couple more mistakes.

The game was close, I think the fact that Leeds were always in the lead, coupled with the Sky propoganda machine in full flow made things appear quite different.

#110 Bearman

Bearman
  • Coach
  • 2,470 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 06:49 AM

I noticed Brian Mac didnt comment on the penalty count. 5-0 at one point!
Ron Banks
Bears and Barrow

#111 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,177 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 07:11 AM

No he was noticably quiet on that point
I wish Tony Smith has said something

#112 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,130 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 07:30 AM

I thought something was amiss with the coverage when they didn't show a forlorn Lee Briers sat in the stand until about the 60th minute, I was reassured when he finally made an appearance. It just doesn't seem like a Wire on sky game without showing him sat watching the game numerous times! :D


On Odsal Top baht 'at.


#113 Emosi Koloto

Emosi Koloto
  • Coach
  • 1,204 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 07:51 AM

I hope McNamara picks both Hardaker and Tomkins for England. The former might not quite have Tomkins' attacking genius, but he might have a better all-round game as a full-back. McNamara is unlikely to move Tomkins to the halves to accommodate Hardaker - which would be my choice - but perhaps the latter might find a place at centre alongside Watkins?

The best piece of skill for me was Ratchford's swoop, surge of pace and kick with the outside of his boot for Monaghan's try... Currie is likely to be an England back-rower within a year or two and still no Super League front rower has produced a single performance to come anywhere near the best that Peacock has produced ever since his mighty effort in the World Club Challenge. Jamie, your country needs you!

I didn't see the whole game but i really like the look of Ratchford, he is a classy player.


Everything under the sun is in tune
But the sun is eclipsed by the moon

#114 Amber Avenger

Amber Avenger
  • Coach
  • 5,778 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 07:51 AM

I'd agree with that, however to me it never felt like a close run thing, however much I'd wished it to be.

 

I agree with this. I can't say I paid too much attention to what Sky were saying either way, but despite Warrington always being in touching distance on the scoreboard (and in the stats, which I didn't realise. It didn't look like that as a very casual viewer), there was no point in the match where I thought "Warrington are in with a real chance of winning here". I'm not saying the didn't have the ability in the squad, as their final two tries showed they are a skillful bunch. However your earlier phrase "closest one-way contest" may be a tad on the harsh side, but it's the closest description of this frankly odd match I have seen so far.

 

I guess the "tries only" highlight video on YouTube will make it look a belter though. Some beauties scored.


Edited by Amber Avenger, 08 April 2013 - 07:53 AM.

SQL Honours
Play off mini league winner - 2002. Bronze Medalist - 2003. Big Split Group Winner - 2006. Minor Stupidship - 2005, 2006. Cup Silver Medalist - 2008, 2009
CHAMPION - 2005, 2009, 2010

#115 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,644 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 08:56 AM

I noticed Brian Mac didnt comment on the penalty count. 5-0 at one point!

Well Leeds are now the man Utd of RL aren't they? They really have to infringe badly to get penalised (so much interference near their line went unpunished) whilst the opposition get pinged every time.

I reckon the other SL teams will just have to get used to it 'cos it ain't going to change.

Edited by Blind side johnny, 08 April 2013 - 09:02 AM.

Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#116 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,185 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 08:58 AM

I agree with this. I can't say I paid too much attention to what Sky were saying either way, but despite Warrington always being in touching distance on the scoreboard (and in the stats, which I didn't realise. It didn't look like that as a very casual viewer), there was no point in the match where I thought "Warrington are in with a real chance of winning here".

As a Wire fan I always had a feeling that we had a chance until quite late. With 19 minutes to go, we were only 8 points behind and winning most areas of the game.

 

On the stats, some examples of why I am surprised that anybody could feel Leeds were 'outstanding':

 

Attacking:

Metres - Wire 1439 v 1378

Carries - Leeds 243 v 202

Ave carry - Wire 7.1 v 5.7

Offloads - Wire 26 v 12

Breaks - Wire 9 v 5

 

So on the positive attack stats - Leeds won one area, basically they had more ball (7 sets more) yet when they had that they made fewer metres, fewer offloads and very few breaks.

 

The big issue (and often is for Wire) is the error stats:

 

Errors - Wire 14 v 7

Penalties Conc. - Wire 8 v 5

 

So basically Wire kept turning the ball over to Leeds and gifting them position with the penalties - I should at this point give credit to Leeds as you can earn penalties and force errors by winning the collision.

 

So what about this awesome defence of Leeds?

 

Tackles - Wire 335 v 296

Misses - Leeds 36 v 29

Tackle completion - Wire 92% v 89%

 

As you can see here, despite Warrington have to make 40 more tackles, their tackling was better.

 

 

Now ultimately, these stats mean nothing - it is the scoreboard which is the most important thing and Leeds deserve the credit for their solid display. Also there are plenty of areas where the stats don't tell the full story. For example they don't describe the quality of tackle, quality of kicking, or whether a team puts in good defence on the back of an error.

 

The only person who gave any kind of balance around the game was Clarkey as he was looking at the stats - his margin metre KPI Tracker suggested a Leeds 2pt win the last time it was showing.



#117 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,185 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 09:19 AM

One more point on the stats (yep - I know, I'm a geek) - but Jamie Peacock is showing some of his best form of his career at the moment IMHO.

 

When you look at the combined efforts of the forwards for both teams:

 

Metres - Leeds 709 v 667

Carries - Leeds 128 v 111

Ave Carry - Wire 6m v 5m

 

When you look at Peacock's Stats individually he made an unbelievable 185m from 27 carries. Leeds' next best forward was Leulai with 97m from 16 carries, which is a very good effort.

 

The bloke is a beast, and the importance of Peacock, Hall and then Sinfield's kicking can;t be overstated.



#118 chuffer

chuffer
  • Coach
  • 3,665 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 09:25 AM

One more point on the stats (yep - I know, I'm a geek) - but Jamie Peacock is showing some of his best form of his career at the moment IMHO.

 

When you look at the combined efforts of the forwards for both teams:

 

Metres - Leeds 709 v 667

Carries - Leeds 128 v 111

Ave Carry - Wire 6m v 5m

 

When you look at Peacock's Stats individually he made an unbelievable 185m from 27 carries. Leeds' next best forward was Leulai with 97m from 16 carries, which is a very good effort.

 

The bloke is a beast, and the importance of Peacock, Hall and then Sinfield's kicking can;t be overstated.

 

Agreed



#119 trakl

trakl
  • Coach
  • 1,180 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 10:01 AM

One more point on the stats (yep - I know, I'm a geek) - but Jamie Peacock is showing some of his best form of his career at the moment IMHO.
 
When you look at the combined efforts of the forwards for both teams:
 
Metres - Leeds 709 v 667
Carries - Leeds 128 v 111
Ave Carry - Wire 6m v 5m
 
When you look at Peacock's Stats individually he made an unbelievable 185m from 27 carries. Leeds' next best forward was Leulai with 97m from 16 carries, which is a very good effort.
 
The bloke is a beast, and the importance of Peacock, Hall and then Sinfield's kicking can;t be overstated.

I honestly cannot remember Peacock - no matter how great he was at Bradford and in his early career at Leeds - look as commanding, as influential and as just plain bloody heroic as he looks now.

England will need perhaps 3 great performances to win the World Cup... who is in a stronger position than Peacock to lead them?

#120 Amber Avenger

Amber Avenger
  • Coach
  • 5,778 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 10:03 AM

Errors - Wire 14 v 7

Penalties Conc. - Wire 8 v 5

 

This is why I never thought Warrington looked like winning. You can throw out all the - admittedly impressive - stats you want, but if you are making more meters than Leeds then dropping the ball before you get a chance to deploy your set play then it's irrelevant (which you allude to to be fair to you). Leeds were more clinical with the posession they had, and that's been the case in their last three matches. In the Leeds/Bradford match at one point the 'Key Performance Indicators' showed the Bulls should have been winning by a couple of scores when they were behind!  

 

You watch Wire more often than me, so you know what they are capable of, but going statsless and watching the flow of the game, I've seen enough RL for it to seem to me they were never destined for the two points. I will freely admit that Leeds weren't all that - although I am always willing to admit that, so might not be worth too much! ;)


Edited by Amber Avenger, 08 April 2013 - 10:04 AM.

SQL Honours
Play off mini league winner - 2002. Bronze Medalist - 2003. Big Split Group Winner - 2006. Minor Stupidship - 2005, 2006. Cup Silver Medalist - 2008, 2009
CHAMPION - 2005, 2009, 2010