Quote: tvoc "27-Mar-11 ….. Won 6 - 28 ….. Wakefield V Leeds ….. Pens For 12 ….. Pens Agst 11
25-Apr-11 ….. Won 34 - 16 ….. Leeds v Crusaders ….. Pens For 11 ….. Pens Agst 6
27-May-11 ….. Lost 6 - 42 ….. Leeds V Warrington ….. Pens For 6 ….. Pens Agst 9
10-Jul-11 ….. Lost 38 - 18 ….. Les Catalans V Leeds ….. Pens For 4 ….. Pens Agst 12
On each of the four occasions Leeds have had James Child officiate the team winning the penalty count went on to win the game. Coincidence or a basic lesson in the bleeding obvious?
__________
One rule I'm finding frustrating at the minute is when opposition players find Leeds defenders not stood square it appears to result in the guarantee of a soft penalty, when Leeds go looking for the same infringement it's invarably play on. Or so it seems.
Henderson won a couple of those today but when Buderus had a legitimate call for one he got waved away. Peacock knocked on in that set and Catalan scored.
Typifies where Leeds are at at the moment.'"
I tried to argue this case yesterday with my brother but he was right when he said you have to earn penalties. When your markers are all over the place like ours were all the time you are going to get penalities against you. We couldnt get any quick plays, so unless Catalans are careless you aint getting many marker or offside penalties.
Highlighted the penalty count stat because i dont think an 12-11 penalty count in your favour wins you game or a 6-9 penalty count means you lose by 36. The 'coincidence' is wakefield and crusaders are 2 of the 3 worst teams in the league and warrington and catalans are 2 of the best, hence the final score.