Re: Jay Pitts : Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:20 pm
Ferdy wrote:
Or as phil Clarke would say hauraki is leading in the KPI.
For me it shows how stats can be misleading. Hauraki looked good pre season but I would have both Clarkson (C) and Pitts (P) above him in the pecking order
For me it shows how stats can be misleading. Hauraki looked good pre season but I would have both Clarkson (C) and Pitts (P) above him in the pecking order
I don't think it is misleading to record that Hauraki in the same number of games this year made:
1. more than twice the metres than P and 4 times then number of C. or
2. a third more carries than P and 2.3 time that of C or
3. 10% more tackles than either P or C or
4. 5 busts against zero from P & C or
5. 3 offloads against 2 form P and zero from C
On the negative side Hauraki has made 3 more errors and given away 3 more penalties than either P or C but these were in that bad performance against Wigan when he also missed more tackles.
So as I said he makes more impact, both positive and negative, than either Pitts or Clarkson but on the whole his positive far outways his negative. He is capable of hot headed stupidity but last season he sorted this out and made a valuable contribution to the 2nd half of last season
IMO I would play Hauraki and Pitts as despite Clarkson improving at Salford he doesn't offer enough impact from the bench.