Any chance of answering the many questions I asked in my reply to your post? Expect this will also go unanswered.
So we'll never know why you thought it relevant to compare Moon and Watkins stats or how you decided playing Burrow only created a defensive shortfall of 10 or so tackles or why you decided to compare Burrow's stats to leading hookers when Burrow has also played a not insignificant part of the season as a starting scrum-half and has also played a mixed role game when starting hooker making such comparisons to genuine hooker's stats pointless.
Quote: Juan Cornetto "This is precisely my point and I fail to understand why you have droned on and on trying to compare Burrow with your traditional hooker.'"
Challenging the validity of your use of stats is hardly droning on - it's highlighting how at times it's ridiculous to do so. Are you going to justify your use of them on this thread now?
Quote: Juan Cornetto "Burrow is a unique talent and we have found a great way to keep him on for the full 80 (and not have him sitting on the bench as some wanted) It works so just accept it.'"
Did it work V Melbourne in the WCC this year or V Huddersfield in the Challenge Cup this year?
How are you defining that it works anyway? In terms of results do you think there has been an improvement in Leeds' win % when Burrow has started at hooker, compared to when he's started at scrum-half this season?
In any case having Burrow sitting out the opening exchanges while on the bench has also worked to good effect (although untested this year) - not least with his unanimous vote for the Harry Sunderland award at the 2011 Grand Final. But then neither uses results in a win every time which is why rather than accepting anything it's still valid to discuss how to utilise Burrow best.
Quote: Juan Cornetto "By jove he's finally got it! A positive as well as a much touted negative'"
Burrow like all players brings positives (as well as some negatives) - I have no issue with the player only with the role he's been asked to play.
Quote: Juan Cornetto "I suppose its one thing for you to finally have to accept the benefits of Burrow as a starting hooker but too much to expect you to give credit to our twice champion coach. '"
Which benefits are these and if they exist why does the coach consistently move Burrow back to starting scrum-half whenever one or both of McGuire and Sinfield are unavailable?
Quote: Juan Cornetto "The chances of finding a Burrow style talent again are quite remote so of course we would have to revert to the boring predictable trad hooker that you dream of.'"
But in the past you've stated that 'Burrow types' were the future direction for the hooking role, so that's quite a u-turn. Glad to see you've now changed this view as it's failed to gain much traction just as I've always suggested it wouldn't.
There is nothing boring or predictable in the modern hooking position, it's arguably one of if not the key role in the team both offensively and defensively. They require structure when directing the forwards around the park and an eye for when to scoot (and equally as important when not to), an ability to put the ball at the right height out in front of the forward running on to it at pace and lead the central defensive unit tie-up the ruck and control the speed of the opposition play the ball/loiter for an ill-judged offload - Buderus was/is text book in all these areas while Burrow remains inconsistent at best in the offensive aspect (despite his career as a successful half-back) and non-existent in the central defensive role. The importance of the hooking position explains why many teams opt for using two specialists in the role while Leeds inexplicably IMO operate with only a filler.
I don't lay the blame on either the players involved or even the coach necessarily for this one who I think is trying to make the best of a under-resourced 1st grade squad in 2013.
