RhinoNeil - It doesn't sound like Maximillion was blaming Watkins for the score but he was blaming Watkins for conceding the penalty for the high shot that gave the field position for the score.

That said the Watkins penalty gave the field position for the second Manu try rather than the 1st - which came after the Peacock knock on which was followed then by the Ablett interference at the play the ball.

Both of St Helens tries followed the recurring theme of an error leading to a penalty which was highlighted as an issue in the build-up last week.

Yeah it's all to do with having Burrow at hooker and Sinfield no longer defending more in middle like he did when at Loose. Teams like to limit the defensive workload of their 2 halves by putting them out wide and away from the bigger guys. We however kind of have 3 halves to protect thus make others have to step up and move in and cover for not having a hooker in the middle of the pitch.

Good defensive hookers will usually make around 30 tackles at least for you in a game, Burrow doesn't usually make even 10 (but still a great tackler for his size btw).

Plus right side is usually busier defensively than left.

Thanks Tvoc....You knew what i meant

Centres usually make 20+ tackles, Senior for example, always had a high tackle count. The number I object to is the number of carries, we simply don't get the ball to him often enough (although as a centre he porbably passes the ball a lot more than say a prop so maybe not an accurate count of the times he gets his hands on the ball). We still don't use his attacking skills adequately. Moon still doesn't leave enough space for his winger and still has a habit of running till he's wrapped up then flinging the ball into a supporting players face.

Comments about our half back/hooker are also relevent. Burrow as a hooker would normally be expected to be near the top of the tackle count and defend more centrally. I guess what we do is play with what we've got in the best way we can. We don't have an outstanding hooker so we shoehorn the players we have into roles that combine the best and make up for that deficiency.

I remember when Matt Diskin got injured in his GB debut, we played for much of 2005 without a hooker at all. Smith got us playing some of the most exciting rugby I've ever seen from a Leeds team. I know we fell short (just) in all competitions, but they were a joy to watch. It can be done.

One more thing, you rarely (if ever) see both centres combining these days. I have always thought that if you can plant both centres on the same side of the field early in the tackle count (particularly deep in your own 22) then it's a superb option to attack wide, early and from deep.

Having Burrow out wide is not completely unique. Chris Sandow generally defends in the centres because he's basically a hopeless defender. Centres generally have a field day against him, but the idea seems to be to hope that cover gets across if he can at least make a nuisance of himself.

My apologies, was a case of selective reading Watkins - missed tackle - first saints try

Was watkins caught slightly out of position for saints 2nd try?

The dummy runner (Wellens) attracted Sinfield in and in turn Watkins followed leaving Manu to cruise through the gap.
I'd say both ST's trys were well worked and knew to target Sinfield/Watkins on the right edge and both mis-read the plays.

Struggling with my memory, but did both Manu tries come from the gap between Sinfield and McGuire?

Wouldn't be the first time if it was, some of the communication and reads between those two this season has been very ordinary leaving some sizeable gaps on that right edge.

www.therhinos.co.uk/matchdaytv/ Watkins and Sinfield for the 1st try ,Watkins and Mcguire for the second!!

www.therhinos.co.uk/matchdaytv/ Watkins and Sinfield for the 1st try ,Watkins and Mcguire for the second!!

It's not unique at all - someone has to defend out wide in every RL team.



Is Sandow a starting hooker though? I always thought he was a half-back.

Why are you comparing Sandow's defensive role who you describe as a 'hopeless defender' with Rob Burrow who IMO is an excellent defender - for a half-back?

In the NRL most half-backs (it seems to me) defend between second-row and centre on either side whereas in SL they often defend one position wider between centre and wing.

Not many, if any, starting hookers (bar Burrow) in either comp or in the history of the semi-pro/pro game have defended one in from the wing though.

Watkins errors in defence and in handling have nothing to do with Burrow. They are part and parcel of the player and are his own responsibility. Centres these days have to do a lot of tackling and Moon has made over a 100 more tackles than Watkins, more offloads and clean breaks from fewer carries. They both have the same number of missed tackles and Watkins more busts and are they are within one try and try assist of each other.

Some folk are still stuck in a time warp regarding the positional job descriptions. Hooker is really a half back role. Traditionally hookers put in a high tackle count around the ruck. However Leeds have proven that there are other ways (outside the box) to accomodate your best attacking players. The Leeds pack share between them the extra 10 tackles or so per game that the 'traditional' hooker would have made in return for the extra attacking effort that Burrow supplies. He has made more metres, more carries, more tackle busts and attacking kicks than any of the leading hookers. His dummy runs make up about 60% of his carries whereas the typical hookers dummy runs make up about 85%-90% of their carries. So Burrow is able to make a further 25% or so carries that are away from the ruck which makes him so dangerous. He must also be easily the fastest hooker in SL and regularly makes inportant one on one tackles out wide that a trad hooker would not make. So we should look at the overall benefits Burrow brings to the Leeds attack. In addition his ability to switch from hooker to SH/SO and back in a game provides Leeds with great flexibility and causes great problems for the opposition teams

Watkins has played several games this year at FB and Wing which would account for the lower tackle amount than Moon.

Regarding the Burrow/McGuire/Sinfield issue in defence. What happens is Sinfield is always on the right side and Burrow the left, whereas McGuire does swap sides from time to time. This must at times cause confusion to the guys next to him wondering and trying to remember whether or not McGuire is on there side on this particular set.

tvoc - Burrow's a halfback, as is Sandow. They are both small. I picked on Sandow as he's the only NRL example I can think of where a halfback consistently defends in the centre position - even supposedly poor defenders play one in from there.

Given the fact that being uthlessly targeted in defence by big centres simply running straight at him helped consign Sandow to the reserves in the worst team in the NRL, I don't think its a particularly good tactic.

If Burrow is a half-back why is he starting games, offensively at least, in the dummy-half position.



I still don't quite follow what Sandow being a poor defender and being pushed one place wider compared to the standard NRL defensive alignment has to do with Burrow, who is IMO an excellent defender only not one suited to defending the central channel and controlling the ruck speed of the opposition from the hooking position.



The tactic there then would be for the inside defenders to either prevent these mis-matches from occurring or give support when they do - that said genuinely poor defenders should consider a code change as League is probably not going to be the game for them - although I probably wouldn't bet on it..

And even if accurate this proves what exactly ? Other than your repeated inability to use Opta to make fair and reasonable, like for like comparisons.

Moon has played all of his 29 games this season at centre. Can the same be said of Watkins? Watkins has played 28 games (all comps) but only 16 of those have been at centre.

Would you expect a Leeds winger or a Leeds full-back to make as many tackles in a game as a Leeds centre is currently expected to?

You can see how many tackles Moon has made from starting at centre and arrive at an average per appearance - in the SL Regular rounds it was 19.08 but how does that figure compare to Watkins when he's started at centre?

Wouldn't that be the only fair and reasonable way to make the comparison you're seeking to make here?




Only if you concentrate on one half of a hooker's traditional role.

So Burrow clearly isn't a traditional hooker but looking at the other top five clubs, which of their recognised starting hooker options - Lunt, Monaghan/Higham, McIlorum and Roby - are excused from the traditional defensive duties in the way Burrow is ?



Perhaps so but it's a role invented to find a spot for an individual who has been ousted from his favoured starting position by another player ousted from his favoured starting position by a player who decided he'd quite like a lighter defensive role in order to extend his useful career for the overall benefit of the team. If McGuire or Sinfield are unavailable then unsurprisingly Burrow is no longer utilised outside the box at hooker but allowed back into his favoured role.

If Burrow's role as starting hooker is integral to the way the team play you have to wonder why he's moved away so rapidly when either half-back is unavailable. Would you move Lunt, Monaghan/Higham, McIlorum or Roby to cover an absent half-back in this way risking disruption and a lack of cohesion at the dummy-half position?



Where does the 'extra 10 tackles or so' stat come from?

In this season's SL Regular Rounds, according to Opta, Burrow has averaged under 9 tackles a game. In terms of total tackles made five of the top six tacklers have been hookers - Houghton, Aiton, Henderson, Clark and Hodgson. Even it these players hadn't missed any regular round games all season they would still be averaging between 31 and 44



So presumably you've separated the stats from those games where Burrow has started at hooker from those where he has started at scrum-half before attempting to make a comparison to these unnamed 'leading' hookers?

You’ve no doubt also taken into account that Burrow almost always plays eighty minute mixed stints whereas these unnamed ‘leading’ hookers probably do not.

Do you not think that trying to compare apples and oranges is a little pointless sometimes?



Have these typical hookers also started 38% of their Regular Round games at scrum-half this season ?



See above.



Yes, there are two sides to every coin.

What’s the chances that when Burrow leaves Leeds will once again revert to a traditional hooker just as they do when he, Sinfield or McGuire is unavailable now? Pretty high I would have thought.

Leeds have created a way to keep their talisman like players on the field and there is something to be said for that but let’s not get drawn in to the theory that the Leeds coach is a rugby league guru re-inventing the wheel – he’s not. No-one will ultimately follow this path – including McDermott himself.

Id have thought this would be a big disruption on the organisation of the defensive line. Why we do that I don't know

Probably because Leeds don't split their halves when attacking.

If McGuire is on the left hand side of the field and Leeds turn the ball over, he's better off staying over there and defending rather than sprinting 40 yards across the field to get to the right defensive position.

When that happens, the players on the right hand side need to be smart enough to see it and compensate accordingly.

This is precisely my point and I fail to understand why you have droned on and on trying to compare Burrow with your traditional hooker. Burrow is a unique talent and we have found a great way to keep him on for the full 80 (and not have him sitting on the bench as some wanted) It works so just accept it.



By jove he's finally got it! A positive as well as a much touted negative



I suppose its one thing for you to finally have to accept the benefits of Burrow as a starting hooker but too much to expect you to give credit to our twice champion coach. The chances of finding a Burrow style talent again are quite remote so of course we would have to revert to the boring predictable trad hooker that you dream of.

What another Danny Buderus clone - please!!

Alas also most unlikely to see another of his ilk for a while too!

Any chance of answering the many questions I asked in my reply to your post? Expect this will also go unanswered.

So we'll never know why you thought it relevant to compare Moon and Watkins stats or how you decided playing Burrow only created a defensive shortfall of 10 or so tackles or why you decided to compare Burrow's stats to leading hookers when Burrow has also played a not insignificant part of the season as a starting scrum-half and has also played a mixed role game when starting hooker making such comparisons to genuine hooker's stats pointless.



Challenging the validity of your use of stats is hardly droning on - it's highlighting how at times it's ridiculous to do so. Are you going to justify your use of them on this thread now?



Did it work V Melbourne in the WCC this year or V Huddersfield in the Challenge Cup this year?

How are you defining that it works anyway? In terms of results do you think there has been an improvement in Leeds' win % when Burrow has started at hooker, compared to when he's started at scrum-half this season?

In any case having Burrow sitting out the opening exchanges while on the bench has also worked to good effect (although untested this year) - not least with his unanimous vote for the Harry Sunderland award at the 2011 Grand Final. But then neither uses results in a win every time which is why rather than accepting anything it's still valid to discuss how to utilise Burrow best.



Burrow like all players brings positives (as well as some negatives) - I have no issue with the player only with the role he's been asked to play.



Which benefits are these and if they exist why does the coach consistently move Burrow back to starting scrum-half whenever one or both of McGuire and Sinfield are unavailable?



But in the past you've stated that 'Burrow types' were the future direction for the hooking role, so that's quite a u-turn. Glad to see you've now changed this view as it's failed to gain much traction just as I've always suggested it wouldn't.

There is nothing boring or predictable in the modern hooking position, it's arguably one of if not the key role in the team both offensively and defensively. They require structure when directing the forwards around the park and an eye for when to scoot (and equally as important when not to), an ability to put the ball at the right height out in front of the forward running on to it at pace and lead the central defensive unit tie-up the ruck and control the speed of the opposition play the ball/loiter for an ill-judged offload - Buderus was/is text book in all these areas while Burrow remains inconsistent at best in the offensive aspect (despite his career as a successful half-back) and non-existent in the central defensive role. The importance of the hooking position explains why many teams opt for using two specialists in the role while Leeds inexplicably IMO operate with only a filler.

I don't lay the blame on either the players involved or even the coach necessarily for this one who I think is trying to make the best of a under-resourced 1st grade squad in 2013.