I said elsewhere that Kirke upped his work rate and the quality of his work. However, lets temper this praise shall we. 8 drives people. 8 drives. I know that is a good "effort" from the cowardly lion but it's stuill only 8 drives.

I think you're giving him too much praise! At least one of those drives was a dodgy offload that fell into his hands whilst he was napping behind everyone else on the Cas line.

Who was at fault when he spilled that ball close to the line late on in the second half? Him or a certain Aussie hooker that provided the pass?

I thought his 1st half stint in replace of JP was vital, same goes for Bailey. Hudson and Chase were flying out the tackles in that set trying to get on top of Leeds but that pair really stood up.

I agree with TVOC.

Its been causing me much consternation. My brain hurts.

I'll go old skool and blame Jamie Mathiou.

League Express have Opta stats for the game which show Kirke as having 7 drives for 61m and 18 tackles with no misses. By way of comparison Bailey had 13 drives/97 metres and 20/0 on the tackle count.

Then you perhaps have to question Opta's ability to count to 8 in that case. I keep a track of Kirke in the televised Challenge Cup games in the unlikely event that Kirke becomes an item for discussion on the forum.

I counted 8 occasions he took the ball in and was tackled in possession (+ the one for the knock on.)

As ever while everyone accepts what Opta outputs I question just how accurate they are.

If anyone is interested, here are Kirke's carry stats:

1st spell, on 29 mins - off 51 mins (22 min stint, 7 carries 69 metres)

30:25 - 6 mt
31:55 - 9 mt
33:00 - 5 mt
35:00 - 22 mt
40:10 - 7 mt
46:20 - 10 mt
49:00 - 10 mt

2nd spell, on 68 mins - off 76 mins (8 min stint, 1 carry 12 metres)

74:20 - 12 mt

Total, 30 min, 8 carries 81 metres

(Interestingly if you ignore the drop-out return on 35 min (although I've no idea why you would) we come close to a consensus so you have to wonder have they mistakenly given those metres to another player? What .... surely not, however people may recall last season when Kirke was erroneously credited with a Rob Burrow 40/20 in one of the many WTF Opta calls.)

Classic Bailey - ripping it up Mutha's !!!

Do you know what he earns? That's what matters in terms of managing the cap - I'd guess he's one of our cheapest 1st teamers.

As for the original question - I'm defending Kirke as he's a permanent scapegoat on here even on occasions where far more experienced and better played members of our squad under perform

No, but then again you don't either.


Don't berate nantwitch for not knowing what kirke earns then take a quantum leap into guessing he's our cheapest player.

FWIW, I'll take a guess. He's been a 1st team regular, not a squad player, a member of the 1st 17 when fit for 6 seasons now. he's not a kid, not an up and coming player. I'll guess he's on more than Ambler, Amor, Singleton, Pitts and any other kid capable of 5 hit ups a game in the Academy. I'll guess he was on more than Burgess, a far better player.

But you know what, his wage is a red herring. Yes, in a salary cap era you do not players to make up your squad who are not big earners. Players desperate to make the 1st team. Those players do not, however, earn a pass when it comes to taking the ball in just because they're on a cheap wage. If Kirke is on less than, Say Peacock, and wants to earn more then frikkin well stop playing like a scardy cat.

Those occasions are few and far between. I'm his biggest critic, I think all would agree. I have praised his better displays on here when they have, rarely happened. Like Sunday for example. But when 4 carries is the magic number more than any other then perhaps, just perhaps, he's gets so much stick because he deserves it on such a regular basis?

Kallum Watkins' two penalty concessions in the opening 7 minutes, Ryan Hall's two knock ons (one unfortunate but the other self-inflicted leading to red zone pressure just before half-time) Ablett's knock on, needless penalty for lifting a leg and not knowing where his left foot was for a potential score, Webb's NFL pass to Delaney are all incidents we could look at and comment on but appear not to while we agonise over Kirke's continued selection even after one of his relatively good days.

(Obviously I started the thread so include myself in any implied criticism but it was an attempt to praise his improved performance.)

Is that because the other players earn some grace for the consistency of their displays in games past whereas Kirke earns some scorn because of the consistency of his displays in games past?

When hall strings three or four games together akin to Sunday, it'll be the norm and not an aberration, likewise Ablett etc.

When kirke's 4 drive games become an aberration and not the norm, perhaps the heat will simmer a little?

Will it though?

I tried to establish with you the other week by which arithmetical measure Kirke's average contribution would be judged and bar a promise of a reply cooked up by your accountant I don't recall us establishing the required parameters.

Here is a case in point where with eight drives in a 30 minute performance (+ 18 tackles with no misses) it's for some still a case of 'is that all.'

Clearly the bloke can't win if we fail to identify a standard with which to judge him by and still attempt to undermine even his better days?



Ablett played the full 80 minutes(?) and carried the ball fewer times than Kirke did in 30 minutes and he made around half the number of carries and tackles as his fellow centre Watkins.

I often get to here what an 'unsung hero' he is and somewhat ironically usually it's from posters singing his praises.