Wigan were extremely impressive, aided and abetted by some poor Bradford discipline & ball control.

Having said that, their intensity suggested they're very much set on hitting top form for the WCC - they should put in a good showing, judging by yesterday - so it'll be interesting to see how they fare once that focus is diluted.

They do. And that is NOT Ian Kirke for the vast majority of the time.

Let's remember, he made 4 carries in round 1. 4 carries. Yes, he was much better when he had to be last Friday but his praise is getting a little out of hand now. Let's see him string 3 or four consecutive displays together before we give him the fanfare, when displays like Friday are the rarity and not the regular.

Also, chasing down wingers is nice, but it's not the main attribute I am looking for in a forward.

Says you. You probably started it.




Especially as for the one V Castleford he was stood having a breather about 30 yards behind play when the ball got to Dixon. Incredible how some people manage to ignore that.

You scrooge tvoc!

He's a good squad player, Kirkey. He won't be on a huge whack and he has dependable hands. He doesn't usually miss tackles and has a fair bit of pace for a big forward. On the other hand he rarely hits his weight and rarely wins a collision. It's frustrating because he could be a lot better. He wouldn't be in my first choice 17 but he is dependable.

Just saying like. I thought I was being my usual charitable self.

Nah then.

Just like to say he were a bluddy disgrace on Friday night.

Inappropriate footwear which has not gone unnoticed. They think we are bluddy stupid and they will gerraway wi it. Not happening sunshine.

Thanking you kindly.

That'll teach me.



Quite. He was probably exhausted from the 2 hit ups he'd made during that 2nd half.

spot on, kirke stepped up because he had to and if he hadn't he would be bombed by brian mac whom i'm sure won't stand for many more 4 carry performances and with bailey coming back to fittness he will be looking over his shoulder. like you i'm all for praising performances when they are consistent but the bottom line is he doesn't do it regular.

He doesn't. If he regularly produced top performances and made the most of the size and strength he has, he'd be first choice. As it is, he's a good squad option who can do a job when called on without (probably) costing a mint.

i'll say he doesn't use his size at all 6' 4" 18 stone? he should be knocking blokes over delaney (a /2nd row) runs the ball in with more vigour than kirke he's another mcdonald or feather for me. brian mac wasn't the biggest prop in the world himself but he ran the ball in hard and hit hard in the tackle. as you say a good (reletivley cheaper) squad option and thats it.

This is a fallacy. He's a first choice. If you're in the 17, you're a first choice. He's been a 1st choice now for four or five seasons. He's not some young kid coming through. His performances should be better. Consistently so and not just on the odd occasion like Friday.

How do any of you know how cheap he is anyway? He's been here for some time. Is he really a cheaper option as a front rower than, say Ambler or a 2nd rower than Dane Manning, both of whom have found their path to the 1st team blocked by him and have been released on either a temporary or permanent basis?

As I said in my original post Brian Mac will stand for no passengers and selection will be based on performance not how many GF medals they've got. It is strange that Kirke is being accused of not punching his weight and knocking players down and inconsistency of performance then you offer Bailey as his replacement who is famous for exactly the same inadequacies with many fans at HQ.
As many posters would verify the goal posts shifted from week to week when it came to assessing Bailey's performances and what would have been considered average from other players was being hailed as MOM performances. It will be Brian Mc D that will make the best assessment of their individual performances and select on that basis.

It was noticeable how much freedom O'Meley enjoyed last Friday compared to the times he faced Leeds with Bailey last year. Not something noticeable from statistics but noticeable to those with an understanding of the game.

bailey hits harder than kirke he winds opponents up, i'm not sure he's the enforcer some say/think he is but hes a far better option than kirke this is why when he's fit he starts most games unlike kirke, my assesment has nothing to do with GF winners rings just what i see week in week out with my own eyes.

Spot on. Sums up my entire opinion of Kirke. He is one of the reasons we were able to win three in a row without breaking the cap.

If there was no such thing as the salary cap, and Leeds had unlimited resources, I don't think anybody could deny Kirke would be replaced, but this isn't football and we're not Chelsea/Man City/Barcelona. You just cannot have "the best player in the world" in every position. In Rugby League, you need players that can just do an OK job, for an OK wage whilst the likes of Peacock, Leuluai, Lauitiiti etc get their breath back.

It is totally and utterly unrealistic to be expecting 150 metres and 25+ carries from EVERY SINGLE PROP. If Kirke was producing the same figures as Peacock, or Graham, or whoever, then he'd be our number 10, first name on the team sheet, and demanding a wage to match (rightly so!!!) which would mean we would either break the cap (and Leeds don't cheat!!!) or have to get rid of someone else high quality and replace them with an average wage, average work rate prop (who would then in turn have a thread berating him for his 'substandard' performances).