Good stuff TVOC!!

Bailey is at best an average prop who tackles effectively.

Yes but I was commenting specifically on Monday's game only.



Indeed that is one aspect and preventing momentum is another. But there was little of this tactic on Monday but too much ineffective tackling IMO. Their forwards gave them good go forward momentum for their acting half back to benefit from quick ball.



I have already covered this point. JJB, Delaney and JP usually are very effective whether 1st, 2nd or 3rd in IMO. On Monday Bailey was a starting prop in place of JP and I guess was expected to fulfill more minutes than the other props so one would expect a higher than normal tackle count which he achieved. But like I said too many of them were ineffective when compared to the other 3 named above IMO of course.



Nothing specific as my comments were based on my impression of the game as a whole viewed just once at the time. Bailey started well, scored a good try and followed it by a good run and tackle bust but for much of the rest failed to dominate in the tackle or in carries.



As previously stated my comments are based on what I saw on the night. You seem to have the time to look at the VT's so why only re-look at the first opening stint?



If you wish to compare the work rate of Bailey with JP, Delaney and JJB you cannot ignore the other important areas of number of carries and metres made. In this department Bailey falls way short of a front line prop.

As you know I never have been taken in by all that hype and nonsense that dims the sight of his fan club members. However I have consistently praised Bailey for his usually reliable defensive efforts - but have also consistently pointed out his lack of go forward. IMO he was best as a 2nd rower because he lacks the primary role of a prop which is to provide impact in the carry and make good metres to put the side on the front foot.

For Saints Walmsley and Manu were allowed to make too many metres and tackle busts. Without a second look at the VT I cannot say if Bailey was any more or less dominated than the other forwards but he did along with JJB and Hardaker make defensive errors that led to tries.

However having made these points I do not single out Bailey as the reason for our defeat. IMO after what should have been a winning start we failed to dominate their pack for the remainder of the game, made silly errors and lacked creativity from our 2 half backs. These factors plus a good and spirited come back from the Saints produced their victory. For me though it was one that got away.

The momentum of the game seemed to change with Bailey leaving. Moore makes some nice runs, but his PTBs are awfully slow, and he doesn't control the opposition PTB speed well either.

As I found no evidence to support your claims re Bailey being ineffective as 2nd and 3rd man in, I chose to put the ball back in your court rather than continue what was appearing to be a fruitless exercise. Taking an overview (such as using the often flawed Opta statistics) is one approach but I find highlighting specific examples enables a reasoned debate to follow on actual clearly identified incidents.

Otherwise the danger is that you end up shedding more heat than light creating controversy about a given individual rather than providing any useful information by which to judge.

Your are the one questioning my comment which you based on watching only the opening stint. I note you were quite happy to quote the often flawed Opta stats for many a past year. Game stats are never going to be an exact science whether collected live or from the VT for obvious reasons. Because the main function of game stats is an aid for the coaches and not an information source for bean counters it doesn't really matter if the odd total is not spot on.

I asked for some specific examples to back up the point you were making re-Bailey. You've provided none. Why is that?

Re-Opta, I refer to them as little as possible but almost always remember to add 'according to' while also pointing out issues concerning clear and quantifiable inaccuracies when I pick them up.

I expect statistics to be accurate at source - before they are inevitably spun to fit agendas.

In quite a number of Bailey's 2nd/3rd man in tackling he can be seen hugging the attacker around the waist while allowing them to walz along gaining further metres. As the first tacklers in have gone upstairs to clamp the ball Bailey as an additional tackler should go in low and prevent their progress. If you care to look at the VT you will see plenty of examples.

He wasn't second or third man in last night on Logan Tomkins.

Another example of his complete idiocy that wipes out any positives he might once have brought to the side.

Frankly, he's a liability and Leeds would be well rid.

It was daft. An example of him at his worst.

But just for that one action you'd base not retaining him? Boarderline -fit. I'm glad our hiring and firing team will look at the bigger picture. It also works both ways in the areas he does well you wouldn't want to keep him solely beacuse he scored a try from an impossible position. Was a skilled score - or 'another example of idiocy' ?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm basing it on. That one incident. Really.

The fact that he didn't take a single hit up until around the 15th minute can't work in his favour either...

Probably busy on Twitter trying to shift his clothing range...

As this is the St Helens game thread Bailey took in Leeds' third carry on their first set of possession - just after the minute mark ....... but if you're talking the Wigan game it was 16 minutes 33 seconds or therabouts before he got his hands on the ball. He did however run in three times as a decoy - often difficult to tell with Leeds whether those runs were by design or by accident but if deliberate it's an effort that gets ignored in the stats.

Grow up.

I don't hear you lambasting other pro rugby players for sideline income streams.

e.g. the army of Herbalife pushers.