One of Burrow's Harry Sunderland Awards came as a starting 7. The other came from the bench but he didn't come on as hooker as Buderus played the whole 80.

I don't think Burrow as ever been truly convincing in the traditional 1st receiver scrum-half role but as Leeds have had another pivot in Sinfield (and to a lesser extent McGuire) he's been an integral part of a formidable trio bringing the skills that few others possess. That's my often repeated balanced view - neither black nor white. If I want to see a traditional scrum-half in SL I'd be looking at the likes of a Danny Brough or a Tim Smith - not a Rob Burrow.



I don't think that's what I'm really saying at all. As G1 has identified, the role I have in mind is the one he performed for this same coach at Old Trafford in 2011 when he uniquely was the unanimous winner of the Harry Sunderland award becoming the first player to claim it twice during the SL Era (Sinfield has now joined him in this respect) and the only player to win it after starting on the bench. That day he added to the threat whether from 1st receiver as he did for his wonder try or from jumping into dummy half as he did when setting up Hall for another memorable and crucial GF score while Buderus 'a genuine hooker' was there to expertly marshal the team around the field and dominate the ruck on defence.



Burrow will never be a 'proper 9' in the traditional sense and I've still to see any evidence that McDermott's use of him catching on elsewhere and I remain of the opinion that it's a role that has been devised only to accommodate one player after Sinfield decided to switch defensive roles in the team, as evidenced by what happens when McGuire is out injured.

Looks like briscoe is not Leeds bound, if we believe GH m.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/spo ... -1-5754990 Mind you this is also the greatest squad ever assembled

Looks like briscoe is not Leeds bound, if we believe GH m.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/spo ... -1-5754990 Mind you this is also the greatest squad ever assembled

or a Union team?

I often wonder what that inevitable speculation is based on these days?

Did someone say that Peter Smith (viewed in some parts as the unofficial head of Leeds' PR department) was going large with this rumor on Twitter ? Perhaps rhinoms?

Yep TVOC it was me.
I asked him (Pete smith)again this morning via twitter and his reply was that the club seem to be going out of their way to deny this deal but still maintained his original source to be a good one.

I would suggest your "balanced view" with regard to Burrow has been much more black than white. Because Burrow doesn't fit in your boxes of "proper hooker" or "proper scrumhalf" you have oft derided him and would have him on the bench. I have sided with the coaches tactic of trying to keep Burrow on the pitch for the maximum time as he is a proven match winning. Whereas both Sinfield and Mcguire have lost some speed Burrow still has enough pace to command a starting place.




I was commenting on what you actually said and I repeat what Burrow has done best IMO is as a starting scrum half staying on the field for 80 minutes and it is where he also won a Harry Sunderland MOM Trophy and has made his greatest contributions as a key member of this champion side.



There you go again qualifying Burrow "in the traditional sense". Why not just except that Burrow is a player with a unique skill set who has proven over a long period that what he offers maybe unconventional but it works. He has always made sideways dashes and these still produce gaps and space and cause havoc to defensive lines. Like Sinfield and McGuire he is now very closely marked which has limited the effectivenes of all 3, but with so few players able to make clean breaks or space with modern defences he still has many more pluses than minuses.

You can suggest it if you like - but it doesn't make it true.

How is to utilise a player's individual talents from the bench in the manner I suggest deriding that player's abilities?

To portray a selection on the bench as being indicative of a putdown is unreasonable unless the person making the selection doesn't value the contribution of the bench players - perhaps you don't - but I most certainly do.




Did you also side with the coach when not using Burrow for the maximum gametime as he did almost exclusively after the season turning loss in Perpignan during July 2011 that culminated in a double unique achievement of unanimous Harry Sunderland Award and becoming the only player starting from the bench to earn MOTM in a SL GF ? It appears in this regard you are consistently behind the coach even when the coach himself is inconsistent in the manner in which he utilises him.




You mention Burrow's speed as it's the one area of his game that remains above question. Perhaps there's more to playing pivotal roles than just speed - in Burrow's case he doesn't appear to be getting on the back of breaks as he used to or is it now with playing a rookie hooker he's not directing the play to where the spaces are for the breaks to be made in the first place. Sinfield losing some speed is a relative observation - it's not as if he ever had much toe (in rugby terms) to begin with so the drop off is marginal.



So if you think Burrow has done best as a starting scrum-half what do you make of his use as a starting hooker for the vast majority of last season and this?



But I do accept it, it's just that I see it best used coming off the bench around the twenty to twenty-five minute mark when having avoided the opening slog he can be both physically fresh and mentally alert to do the damage running at gaps around the ruck area whether from acting half or first receiver that we all have seen and know he is capable of and much as he was allowed to do by this coach during the latter portion of 2011.




When did this close marking of pivots come about in RL - not something the likes of Lewis Jones, Mick Shoebottom, John Holmes or Iestyn Harris ever had to contend with I'm sure.

How many clean breaks does Rob Burrow even make these days and more to the point would that number be liable to increase if he spent less total but more targetted minutes on the field?

As I said his best position is as a starting scrum half where he is in a wider position to make and support breaks.

But I question your logic. You keep stating you wish Burrow to come off the bench after 20/25 minutes...are you saying to replace the hooker or the scrum half?



Burrow has the talent to be effective whatever the position. But he has been most effective as a starting scrum half whereas you stated he has been most effective coming off the bench



The modern game is much more defensive based and has the benefit of subs and bench rests for starting players. Also players are now full time and much fitter than the part timers who did a 40 hour working week with 2 evening training sessions and an 80 minute game. Are you suggesting defensives are not as effective these days?

In the last few seasons the adjudicating of the ruck has changed and we now see a slow PTBs with a lot of messing about to delay the attack. This has allowed defences to regroup quicker than before with a result that key players from most sides are less effective on attack. IMO this has had a negative effect on creative players like Burrow, McGuire and Sinfield.



Burrow is on course to match or beat his number of clean breaks for 2010 and 2011 and has made the most carries of any Leeds player this season (almost reaching at the half way stage what he made in the whole of each of the two previous seasons), He is 3rd best metre maker and is on course to beat any of his previous seasons. He is 4th for tackle busts only just behind Hardaker and Watkins and is on course to beat any previous season. He also is our 4th best player for try assists and on course to beat all his previous seasons. He also has made the fewest missed tackles of the regular 17 this season, so his overall contribution has been substantial.

So I guess that also puts the Clark rumours to bed.

Can I take it you won't be addressing these two specific points



__________



Why do you question my logic, did you also question coach McDermott's logic when he did precisely this after the season changing defeat in Perpignan in July 2011? I presume you got your answer at that time and no doubt received it as perfectly logical at the time. If you really want me to remind you how McDermott introduced Burrow off the bench around the twenty five minute mark in those games then I will and furthermore I would basically do the same going forward given similar personnel to rotate around.



When did I say that? I wouldn't necessarily say that has been the case for all his career but it is how I would utilise his abilities now.



Everything is relative. In the good old days all players were basically in the same boat as each other as is the case today. Your point was that Burrow, McGuire and Sinfield are now closely marked to reduce their effectiveness and my response to that is when was it ever any different for them? Burrow's duck at the line perhaps used to catch people out more but as opposition coach's adapt systems to counter, it inevitably becomes less effective over time. The scoot and duck, whether from dummy half or first receiver was Burrow's USP as he never really possessed a consistent passing game that troubles defences as McDermott now appears to acknowledge by using Sinfield and McGuire in the halves instead - when available. Yet McDermott moves Burrow back into the halves whenever McGuire is injured so does that highlight a possible lack of faith in Burrow the hooker? Shouldn't McDermott commit to his preferred starting hooker rather than this chopping and changing?

Hooker is a key position and IMO requires consistency and clarity - 1st choice with understudy - not a filler option. When Lowes was hooker at Bradford, Diskin at Leeds, Cunningham at St Helens, Newton at Wigan etc and one of their respective half-backs was out injured did they ask the regular starting hooker to switch roles and play scrum-half? I don't recall that they did.



Interpretation at the ruck area seems to ebb and flow all the time. At times it's been a quick ruck (which personally I hate) at others painfully slow (also frustrating) but taken as an average I don't think it's actually that different when viewed over all their careers.



Why are you comparing anything that Burrow does in 2013 to what he did in 2010 and 2011? In 2013 Burrow is the starting hooker, what position was he playing in 2010 and 2011?

The query over comparability between those selective seasons aside - Burrow in 2013 according to Opta has made 4 clean breaks in total (2 fewer in total than McShane) at an average of 0.25 per appearance (McShane 0.462 - let's not even worry about the comparative minutes they've each played) isn't that the telling comparison to make?

Why is the carry stat for a starting hooker worthy of note here - four of the top five in this category this season (according to Opta) are the regular starting hookers for their sides also so a high number of carries kind of comes with the territory. You'll note that according to your source of oh so reliable information that Danny Houghton, Jon Clarke, Shaun Lunt and Ian Henderson are all props while Jamie Peacock is a hooker (as is Paul Wood at Warrington) and of course Burrow is still listed as a scrum-half so absolutely no confusion there then.



As you'd expect given his change of role?



You may be right in regards to total (only time will tell) but he's going to have to go some to beat his best figure so far which was the 72 in 2007 (according to Opta) Season totals are not the unit of measure I'd use here for comparison purposes as they could and most often will come from a differing quantity of games played in each year, so I would prefer to use the average per appearance figures. His 2013 average of 2.25 per appearance is, I make it, only his 7th best to date (according to Opta) - do you agree? That places it currently as his fifth worse average and three of those came in the first three years available on the Opta site - covering 2003 to 2005.

By that measure he's going to have to be mighty if he's going to justify your prediction in terms of total given the number of Regular Rounds played and those left still to play, never mind my preferred measure for comparison purposes - average per appearance.



In terms of try assists Burrow isn't 4th, he's equal 3rd with Hardaker - you remember Hardaker, that player who you claim cannot pass for toffee. Makes you wonder how he finds himself so far up that list - surely some sort of mistake?

Again the claim that he's on course to beat his previous tallies is yet to be seen - well past the half way stage in games and still less than half way to his season best total of 13 in 2008. Again I'd use the average per appearance as a more accurate measure for the reason already given above and as per above I make this season so far only his 7th best. Do you agree?

It's never been a category he's shown up well in as a starting half-back and it's perhaps easy to see why McGuire has taken over his previously coveted scrum-half role possessing as he does a superior passing and short kicking game overall - not that I'd particularly wish to use Opta to back that assessment given the previously highlighted apparent discrepancies such as in round 2 of 2012 Burrow was awarded two try assists in a game where Leeds only scored one try (Darrell Griffin off a inside drop-off ball from Burrow at dummy-half) - the additional try assist appears to have been a correction from week 1 after an erroneous award had gone to Brent Webb - except it shouldn't have gone onto Burrow's total at all but rather that of Lee Smith.

lol!! I bet you have Leeds Rhinos PJ's and the lot!!

Burrow is not great as the main passer from acting half. He can do it occasionally (and in fact needs to do so to make his scoots more effective), but its not a role he should be spending a lot of time in. With Lunt (and before him Buderus and Diskin) around its not a role he had to perform for long periods, and IMO trying to make him do it has probably hurt his confidence as well as the rest of the team.

For me Burrow should be given a free-ish role. Attcak out wide, or get into dummy half as the opportunity comes along. The downside is that it may harm our structure, not that we ever look like we have one.

Whether we start with him or he comes off the bench is interesting. I dont buy the theory that having a better player on for longer, or getting more ball is automatically a better thing. Burrows speed and agility provides impact because of the difference with the opposition. For me a fresh burrow coming on at 15 minutes gives the best balance. The players he will be attacking at fatigued, and he is fresh. Those gaps are unlikely to be there in the same way in the opening quarter. Any appearance from him at dummy half in this period would result in his freshness being dulled, and having less impact when the gaps appear.