: Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:17 pm  

rhinoms wrote:

So you have to be huge to be decent then???
I'd prefer to see how worrall come's back after his 1st season at 1st team level before writing the lad off mate.

Your choice, I've seen enough.

As I said previously for me Worrall wasn't big enough, strong enough or explosive enough and at 24 those characteristics aren't likely to alter.

Funny thing is I expressed the same opinion last season (even before the injury) and IIRC you agreed with me.

: Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:17 pm  

tvoc wrote:

More than the 21 games he played in last year as Leeds' 5th prop?

time spent on the park would be a better indication

: Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:43 pm  

King Monkey wrote:

time spent on the park would be a better indication

I can't help you there but from his stats:

2008: 1559 metres from 208 carries (10.95 carries at 7.4952 metres per carry per game and 260 tackles at 13.68 per game)

2009: 652 metres from 87 carries ( 12.43 carries at 7.4943 metres per carry per game and 119 tackles at 17 per game)

It appears his workload is increasing but I wouldn't exactly call it a significant shift at this stage. An extra one and half carries and three tackles could be covered by an extra two or three minutes of gametime.

: Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:32 pm  

tvoc wrote:

Your choice, I've seen enough.

As I said previously for me Worrall wasn't big enough, strong enough or explosive enough and at 24 those characteristics aren't likely to alter.

Funny thing is I expressed the same opinion last season (even before the injury) and IIRC you agreed with me.

I thought he was ok was it in term's of who to retain and re-sign??
After reading an interview at the end of the season he was carrying that shoulder injury throughout the year until we had everyone fit then he had the surgery this led to him not being able to do the full weight and strength training.
I'm prepared to give the lad a chance and see how he does as a squad player having being able to fully train.

: Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:46 pm  

rhinoms wrote:

:?
I thought he was ok was it in term's of who to retain and re-sign??

I think it was in terms similar to those I set out above. That he would never make a starting place due to his lack of physical attributes but that he was cheap and therefore OK to have around as cannon fodder to cover for back row injuries.

: Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:06 am  

tvoc wrote:

I think it was in terms similar to those I set out above. That he would never make a starting place due to his lack of physical attributes but that he was cheap and therefore OK to have around as cannon fodder to cover for back row injuries.

I still don't think he'd be 1st choice 17 mate i agree 100% but as a squad member he could prove valuable especially if we need the like's of kirke to do stint's at prop.

: Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:55 am  

tvoc wrote:

My post from back on Page 1:



More than the 21 games he played in last year as Leeds' 5th prop?

It looks like more will be expected of all four remaining props and not just Burgess. It'd be difficult to imaging being able to flog them much harder than they did then without breaking them though.

How many of Peacocks' 31 games last year were at prop though?

If you will recall we had a bit of a 2nd row and centre crisis last year which resulted in him starting a fair amount of games in the 2nd row and spending time in other games there.

I know your stats can only quantify starting posiotion so lets have a look at that for now.

: Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:57 am  

batleyrhino wrote:

No but if you are a forward, it helps...

Someone should tell Jamie Jones Buchanan.

As for Worrall, he's squad depth but still played a significant role in a championship season which shows he can do a job.

I don't rate him but i am rarely too vociferous in such negative opinions as I felt even less about JJB up to 2004.

Kirke can prop when all the back rowers are fit.

: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:25 am  

Our squad has the following forwards (hookers excluded)

Props:
peacock
burgess
bailey
leuluai

second row:
JJB
Lauiti'iti
Kirke
Ablett
Worrall

After that there are acadamy lads who haven't stepped up, such as Ambler and Haley, who I'd expect to take up some of the work-load left by scrutons departure.

I think it looks a little thin, if our general match day squad is 4 props and 4 second rows, although that will change to 2 & 1 when Buderus is back, it doesn't leave us great for injuries of longer than 2 or 3 weeks.

But if we are lucky, and play things right the young lads can come in now when they are not critical and allow some of the senior players to have a rest, whilst getting them experience. When they are needed they can then then call upon some SL experience.

: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:27 am  

leicester_rhino wrote:

Our squad has the following forwards (hookers excluded)

Props:
peacock
burgess
bailey
leuluai

second row:
JJB
Lauiti'iti
Kirke
Ablett
Worrall

After that there are acadamy lads who haven't stepped up, such as Ambler and Haley, who I'd expect to take up some of the work-load left by scrutons departure.

I think it looks a little thin, if our general match day squad is 4 props and 4 second rows, although that will change to 2 & 1 when Buderus is back, it doesn't leave us great for injuries of longer than 2 or 3 weeks.

But if we are lucky, and play things right the young lads can come in now when they are not critical and allow some of the senior players to have a rest, whilst getting them experience. When they are needed they can then then call upon some SL experience.

Haley's left for good, I'm lead to believe.

We have Chandler and Hardbottle who look a bit handier than Ambler.