The sad thing is though when you get near him he's a giant and built like a brick outhouse unfortunately he's missing the fire and aggression to make good use of it!

Work? Congrats

That's the wrong Damo Doc!

Yeah, I'm the intellectual Damo

You're thinking of the Damo who has Nick Clegg on speed dial.

Avoiding the discussion on Kirke. I hardly think so. It's been said, ad nauseum.

You've repeated the arguments in Kirke's defence, I've addressed them I'm not interested in some epic Juan versus TVOC debate. I intend to devote as much effort to discussing Kirke going forward as kirfke devotes to match days, the bare minimum.

So, in a nutshell, he's lazy and soft.

Fair enough, don't go bringing him into another players discussion next time.

I'm sure we will be here in about 5 days time repeating it all again., until then I bid you good day

When the next generation read about this period of glory in years to come they will take note of his 5 rings etc.

I'm not sure he will be remembered. People will remember Burrow, mcguire, sin field, peacock. I would doubt people will remember kirke as a great, even if he wins another 5 rings

You aint the boss o me

I'm not talking about him being remembered by people who have seen him play.Most of us have read the Headingley story and seen names of players we have not seen.Players who's names are not legendary.Arthur Clues for instance club legend only won a yorkshire championship medal.It ain't fair

This stat shows a big fall from his previous 2 years, however taken on its own it is misleading (no surprise G1 has already accepted this without question) Before a judgement is made it should be put into context by taking into consideration other factors for example the number of tackles each player has made. Also comparisons with his team mates percentage misses.

Both the Eagle and myself have made the point that positional play should no longer be judged in the traditional sense. Coaches have been using players so that they concentrate on their best attributes without the restrictions of the numbers on their backs. eg

This point fails to understand that Kirke is in to do a defensive job around the ruck and when he does make a carry he makes more metres per carry than any of our other forwards. We do not use Kirke, Bailey or Clarkson for impact but rather to allow first choices a rest.

Having said all this Kirke has been dissappointing and making him a less reliable defender this year.

I would have assumed that most of the time backs will have a worse miss ratio than forwards simply because of the where and the type of play they are defending.

especially at FB

Tomkins for instance is at 21.7%, Kearney 26.9% Lomax is at 23.25%, Grix is 30.83%, Escare at 29.57%

Ahh the good old "he's the biggest player in the team but we don't use him as a go forward Prop".
Se when "others" JP included are having a breather and our 6ft 5" 17.5 stone Prop is just on to defend around the ruck WHO should be doing the "Hard yards" and actualy going forward as ANY Prop should be able to do??
To have 3 forwards selected for "Breather stand ins" is at the very least far fetched especially one as big as IK.
So when Coaches are talking about their subs "making an impact" and either maintaining momentum or "Changing momentum" if its Bailey ,Clarkson or Kirke it doesn't apply?

Interesting take on things, as Bailey has this year vastly started alot more games than he's appeared from the bench.

So I'm not sure who you think he's relieving.