He's clear not shot. The reality is that if you make 50 tackles in a game you are going to look worn out. He is being over used and under rested. The bench user on Thursday was woeful, and had a large part to play in us losing the game

You forgot to put how many misses. Misses that were crucial to the result. Misses that were made out of fatigue, due to those extra tackles, due to no hooker defending in the middle.

Wasn't it six misses?

Are YOU deliberately trying to miss the point here? It seems so. Delaney looks knackered exactly because he is being asked to do this amount of work. How many tackles did he miss, or perhaps more importantly how many did he not even make it to. These are the impacts that over playing people have on a team. Of course he should start the game, but if he gets 20 minutes rest and makes 35 tackles instead of 50 with Walters making the other 15 then he is not only in better shape for that game, but also next week and the week after. Tired players make poorer quality decisions, this is fundamental, there is never a reason to flog a player when there is a fit and fresh one on the bench.

How do calculate the tackle count if there are 3 in the tackle do they all get awarded the tackle?

The most alarming tackle stat is Kallum Watkins having to do 39 tackles because he's having to defend further in because he had both McGuire and Sinfield outside him.

Arguably our best strike player and he's having to tackle like a 2nd rower. But apparently modern day hookers it's not important that that can defend, pffft.

I did not say it was a good idea. But I am saying it would not have made the slightest bit of difference to the result and to pretend so is incredible. We are talking about Walters as the replacement you know the one who against Catalans made a total of 6 tackles 3 misses and no carries. Is that the sort of match winning impact you are craving?

Delaney was interchange after 50 minutes and also had had the half time rest. If he had had a longer rest he would not have made 50 tackles would he? I very much doubt his replacement (Walters) would have been able to make up for Delaney's work rate had he replaced him earlier.

Yes Delaney had 6 misses + 50 tackles made.... whereas Garbutt who came on fresher after 26 minutes made 23 tackles and 5 misses and Ablett 25 tackles and 5 misses and even the fully rested Singleton who you wanted on earlier had a higher missed tackle ratio. So why pick on Delaney who actually was rested after 50 minutes?

Well I tend to miss your points because they are often flawed and usually negative.



Delaney often looks knackered yet is capable of doing long minutes and keeping up a high work rate just like JP. You say he looks knackered because he is being asked to do this amount of work. Well this is true but it is equally true to say that this is the role he plays in the side just like JP, JJB and now Ward they all offer high work rates and minutes. It is why they are selected. The trend is to reduce the number of interchanges so there is a need for players that can do long minutes.

Players who regularly make a high number of tackles will also make a few misses. Garbutt, Ablett and Singleton all had a worse missed tackle ratio in this game and two of these were replacements. Last week against Catalans Walters made 6 tackles and 3 misses and no carries when he came on. Is this the type of impact replacement you are suggesting for our top tackler?

You then pose a nonsense question asking [i"perhaps more importantly how many did he not even make it to"[/i

This is comedy gold! Are you seriously saying a player that has made 50 tackle + 6 missed tackles and 10 carries has time to make any more ? I will tell you something now. A tackling machine like Delaney cannot make any tackles if he is sitting on the bench especially if replace by the likes of Walters ....now that would make an real negative impact on the team.




You also said

[i"Delaney in particular has been busted for as long as I can remember and a break of 20 mins old have meant he would have been more effective when on the field.[/i

Perhaps you didn't spot it but Delaney was rested after 50 minutes on top of the half time rest.

Juan, I am not going to get into a "quote-a-thon" with you, they become boring and derail a thread. I am also not in need of a lecture on the sport and its tactics, 30 years of playing watching and coaching tells me more about this sport than you ever could. We clearly have differing views over the coach and his approach, yours is blind loyalty which ties in nicely with McDermotts military background (perhaps you also come from the military this would support your blind faith approach), my approach otoh is more balanced even if you choose not to see it.

I'm no longer going to debate with you if you can't understand such s simple concept as not being able to be in the right place in a defensive line because you are knackered. God help anyone who ever worked or played under your leadership...

It's impossible to know whether Walters would have made any difference. He may have. Equally, he may have worsened the lack of cohesion in our defensive line. I can understand where those who say Delaney lucked f****d are coming from though; he looked that way to me too. Don't know how many carries he made but a 33 year old making 50 tackles would ideally not be making many.

I can't see walters making a difference on his ability but giving others such as ablett a ten minute rest would have made a massive difference.