Listen to what you have put. And then look at the truthfull situation we are seeing right now.

There is a huge difference. Kirkle is indeed a very good squad player. What Kirke is though right now is a first choice selected 13 player. He is in the team week in week out now. On that basis IMO and it appears others, he is not good enough for that role. Squad Yes.

Aye, Leeds should be spending a quarter of their salary cap on a back row like Solomona, Morrison and Menzies.

Then they'd be ripping up the competition rather than languishing two points behind the leaders.

You have a point to a degree.

My criticism of his form earlier in the thread doesn't mean I don't think he should've been re-signed. For the right money and the right role then yes.

Point, completely missed.

Let's not under-play the significance of Ian Kirke.

2 Grand Final rings, and he had Wilkin in his pocket in both of those.

He's not as good as JP, but after JP I'd say he's the next best front rower. In terms of ability and form he's impressed me more than Kylie, Bailey and Burgees this season.

And he plays well at second row on the fringes.

For me he is a player who is still developing, he's adding attacking plays to his game, we've seen numerous offloads and breaks from him this season. I believe he's learnt a hell of a lot from JP. Why not learn from the best?

Ultimately his size is his main tool. When driving he attracts 2/3 players every drive, with the aim to get a quick play the ball. He does this quite effectively.

In every great team you need a core backbone, and Kirke is part of that. He does his job in a proffesional manner. And the big games seem to attract his solidness, so very worthwhile. Good squad player? No, he's more than that. Good member of our 17? Yes. The benefit of Kirke seems missing on some, but I see it, and so do the coaches. And he has the Grand Final rings to back it up.

Not difficult with your inane ramblings.

Irrespective of whether a player starts on the field or off the bench, it's a 17 man game if you want to be successful.

He was in the 17 week in, week out during 2007 - seemed to go alright, ask him to show you his GF winners ring sometime.

He missed a chunk of 2008 injured, but came back strongly enough to pick up another GF winners ring featuring regularly in the 17 during the second half of the season.

And you're implying he's not good enough to be anything other than a fringe player? Have a word.

Point completely missed again. Show me where I said that?

Disagree with that. He is a first choice 17 player but not a first choice 13.
The reason he is first choice 17 is because of the ptoblem in bringing Eastwood over and the consequential lightness of the pack.

IMO heis behind Peacock, Leuluai and Bailey at prop (about level with Burgess) and behing JJB, Ablett and Ali in the 2nd Row. If Eastwood had been here he would have struggled to make the matchday 17.

I completley disagree.

How has he managed to fluke his way into the last 2 grand finals then? Explain in your own time.

And that is where we do actually agree. And on that basis, I see no problem in Kirke been rewarded with a new contract. Giving competition to others, and allowing us to rotate.

However, I see a different picture forming.

By getting his chance later in the season on both occassions, and giving good form going into both games.

Are we seeing the same form now? are we balls. Does that mean he is not deserving of a new contract? not in my opinion, he is a good squad player.

"What Kirke is though right now is a first choice selected 13 player. He is in the team week in week out now. On that basis IMO and it appears others, he is not good enough for that role"

If that doesn't mean that you don't think he's good enough to be in the 17 week in, week out then what does it mean?

Honestly, knitting fooking fog again...

When is kirke doing this work?

He had a lot of game time last Tuesday with JJB's injury.

He carried the ball 7 times, made 33 metres at an average carry of 4.71 (worst amongst our forwards). He also missed 4 tackles. Much poorer than Bailey.

Kirke can and has put in much better performances than that but not on a consistent and regular basis.

He's not the cornerstone of anything I am afraid. He's done some good stuff and I can agree with bloodbath and Gilder's assessment of him to a degree but I am afraid there's a touch of the Feather about him. He's got the raw tools and the size but too often puts in powder puff displays, Tuesday being one of the worst.