The significant drop in Halls' try tally over the last two years is matched by his increase in carries over the same period which is too much of a coincidence to dismiss so easily. But of course there will be other factors and one of those is that the whole Leeds back line is missing the attacking skills of Webb at fullback

A glance back at posting on this forum will show many comments regarding Hall's early season drop in form and comments about his weight. As previously commented upon he also made some errors close to and over the line which were most un-Hall like. Another factor is the general improvement in defenses and a drop in form of Sinfield and others.

Finally after all the bluster, Juan Cornetto finally gets Something spot on, in just one sentence. And it happened to be his last.

Why are they flawed then?

You make a fair point.

My use of stats is to back up opinions first formed by watching games and players. If the stats do not back up my opinions I have to question these opinions and perhaps accept I could be wrong.

Stats per game of course can mislead for the reasons you highlight and also as they are incomplete eg: minutes on the field. However stats taken over a longer period will average out the anomalies to show clear trends. And if you use the per carry figures you add even more data from which to make more meaningful averages.

Neruda and Printer prefer to use the simplistic per game stats and presumably they use miles per day to work out their cars economy too rather than miles per litre!

Using the 'neruda' method of assessing performance lets look at goal kicking skills. Hardaker kicked 13 goals in 5 games with 10 misses giving him goals per game figure of 2.6. This is close to the goals per game average of the likes of Burns, Bridge and Tickle

However the accepted method of success assessment for goal kickers is to use the total number of attempts at goal in the same way the metres per carry is used.

Therefore using the accepted method of assessment for goal kicking, Hardaker has a success ratio of 56.5% whereas the likes of Burns, Bridge and Tickle are in the 72% to 77% region. So using just the per game formula gives a distortion. There will always be anomalies and exceptions with stats but used forensically they do show clear trends and as such are a vital part of team management. Also we do not have the full stats that the clubs have so we do not get the full picture.

I have never suggested that stats are used for anything more than backing up an argument.

if you had already decided that Wellens is a better full back than Hardaker before you got your stats, then i dont think anyone can help you

Once again you jump to conclusions. You have no idea what I have decided. What I have made clear for some time now is that I consider Hardaker to be a very good fullback, possibly the best defensively. However he certainly is not the best offensively as he currently is lacking in passing ability and good decision making judgements.

To make claims of him being the best fullback in SL without seeing sufficient of the other contenders shows a club bias. To ignore and "laugh" off clear evidence that is contrary to your opinions shows prejudice and to suggest that I somehow need your help because I do not agreed with you shows your arguments have reached the buffers.

why do you think i havent seen sufficient of the other contenders? and how would irrelevant skewed stats fix that anyway?
its not just me btw. whoever put him in the super league dream team obviously did so without seeing sufficient of the other contenders and showed a leeds rhinos club bias.

If Zac ends up being as good as Wellens has been he will be one of the best players in SL history

And yet Sinfield has to be in your starting line up - bizarre

It's only bizarre when you have a biased opinion. I never mentioned positions for any of the players I would start in games.

Regardless of that, is the point I actually agreed with JC was that the form of the half backs is the reason for the reduction in the effectiveness of our attack. Your obsession with Sinfield goes beyond reasonable opinion at times.

No yours does based on last year's form he should struggle to get in the team - a definite starter in your view - as I said bizarre but entirely predicable based on your hero worship

He is in there because of his leadership qualities. The best leader we have ever had, and the only one with the credentials. Every team needs a good leader. Regardless of that despite his poor form, he is still miles better than the alternatives, who were even worse form.

Like I said, your negative bias goes beyond reasonable.

He does.

You posted several pages ago that those 7 players in your list were better than ZH as it was too difficult to choose just 3 or 4.
Wellens was in your list.

Which is ******* hilarious by the way and I doubt even the most ardent of Saints fans would agree with that one.