It's only about "opinions" if you disagree on the the definition of "best Full Back".

For me the uppermost qualities should very much include [ione-on-one defence, bomb disposal and kick return[/i as best qualifying claim for "best full back". I therefore concur with you that Zak is comfortably the "best".

Would much rather see Zak in the spot than anybody else in SL.

I have in the past advocated the possibility of Zak moving to SO long before today (and suffered ridicule accordingly of course). However, this was before I witnessed just how good the lad is at FB in accordance with what I consider to be the best qualifying elements in said position

Agree for me the main points are 1 on 1 defence and kick returns. I would say organising and a talker are fair skills for a full back also as he gets a good view of what's happening. I would say he is the best full back in SL at the moment. And regarding his passing while not the best I have seen an improvement in this area from him

I agree with you Sal both on this and also that he is overrated by many. His game is based on physicality and work rate but he is currently lacking the skills I like to see in key positions. IMO his current best position is on the wing but until the likes of Golding gain more experience he will remain at FB. I can see him as a future back row man which may suit him best of all.

Most of the other FBs in SL have better try scoring, try assist and clean break averages which is one of the reasons Leeds were below par on attack last season. Sure Hardaker returns the ball strongly but not cleverly enough IMO. It is what you do with the ball that counts.

On his first half of the season performance I would agree, but on his second half of the season performance I do not agree.

his games not based on physicality any more than any other full back
his fantastic try savings tackles are all about technique, not physicality.
his ability to field kicks, and take high bombs, is down to his positioning and technique.
how is his game based on physicality?


are Escare and Shaul better full backs because they scored more tries?
and what about 'tackle busts' averges and 'metres per game' averages?
i dont need 'try' and 'try assists' stats to see that Hardaker was better than most, if not all, full backs in the league last season.

i agree 100% with this post and i wouldn't swop any current sl full back for zak and under any circumstances

The fact it is Juan Cornetto agreeing with Sal tells you all you need to know about how wrong he was

For someone who has been proved wrong on so many occasions I don't think you are really speaking from a position of strength are you!!

Sometimes best to let people think you a fool than post something and confirm everyone's thoughts



On here we all have opinions and that is all they are - your opinions are no more fact than anyone else's, neither are mine that is the reality.

Perhaps you should spend less time stalking the likes of Andy Lynch at Kippax in the new year?

If I had a picture of an handbag right now, I would post it, and go whoooooohoooo

.

Just move on Sal. You are right about opinions, but at least on this one the fact his peers feel the same way, tells you who was correct.

You aren't seriously suggesting the dream team is justification for your view point? Oh you are

I am suggesting you are wrong David, which you are, and that throughout the game players would point at you in laughter.

When you consider he came from the second tier and got into the team earlier than expected in the wing. Then stepped in at centre and whilst not being a world beater did enough to fill in for Keith. Then he covers full back for Webb and does even better. I think he's done remarkably well given he's only had 2 full seasons at fb and there's been a considerable improvement in his play. Whilst a big fan of Lomax and Russell I wouldn't swap either for him. Last year his form dropped off but it was around the time of Silverwoodgate so was no surprise. When our scramble defence was on fire at the start of last season he was a big part of it.

Seconded that's the best compliment i personally could pay to ZH i wouldn't swop him for any other FB in this League.
As for his form dropping off is anyone surprised the whole team went to pieces and he had the RFL farcical "lip reading" case hanging over his head.
He had to adapt to play Centre ,he handled it and lets not forget we won a GF with him playing there and looking more than comfortable then he was shifted to FB and has excelled there imo.
Like i've posted before Daryl Powell has stated more than once that he sees ZH as a future 6 now lets be honest DP wasn't a bad player and an even better Coach so i'd happily at the very least see him tried there should he stay and Golding continues his progress to take the no1 shirt.

His defense is usually based on physicality and his attacking runs are certainly not based on silky skills. You have chosen to overlook that he has also made positioning errors that let in tries. Having said that my critical comments were made with regard to his attacking abilities as the discussion was about Hardaker as a possible Stand Off.




Escare, Hanbury, Bowen, Lomax, Eden, Grix, Rankin, Godinet ,Wellans, Eden, Dorn, Shaul & even Mathers all have better try scoring averages per carry than Hardaker

Escare, Bowen, Lomax, Hanbury, Rankin, Eden, Grix, Godinet,& Wellans all have better try assist averages than Hardaker.

For clean breaks all the following are ahead of Hardaker and several are two or three times better: Escare, Bowen, Lomax, Hanbury, Mathers, Rankin, Eden, Dorn, Grix, Shaul, Owens, Godinet, Kear & Wellans

You asked about tackle bust averages well Escare, Russell, Bowen, Dorn, have better averages than Hardaker

You also asked about the metres gained averages which show Escare, Russell, Bowen, Hanbury, Dorn, Shaul, to be above Hardaker.

Now of course this detail does not prove any of them to be better or worse than Hardaker as a fullback but it does rather support the view that Hardaker is not only below average in three key attacking areas but towards the bottom of the pack which for someone being touted as the best fullback is a real handicap given that FB is one of the key attacking positions. It would also be something of a drawback on the cv of anyone being considered for the position of standoff too.

IMO Hardaker at his best doesn't have the class of Webb at his best and this lack of attacking class has been a reason the Leeds back line failed to fulfill its promise apart from the early matches last season. Hardaker was outstanding in the first half of the season and very average in the second half. As I have said his kick returns are very good and he can blast people out of the way, but his passing, kicking and creativity are lacking. Maybe he can improve these skills?

I suppose that your hero worship of an alleged drinking chum makes you right!

All very well doing by 'Per Carry' but we all know that the Leeds back 3 do a lot more work in their own half starting sets than others do so it doesn't paint the clearest picture.

Also this good 1st half of season/bad 2nd half thing.

Well the Warrington game with the homophobic issue was Round 14 which is pretty much the first half of the season.......when he eventually got to play in the 2nd half of the season in 4 league games (vs Cas, Sal, Brad, Lon) he scored 2 tries, assisted 4 and ran for over 200m in two of the games. Add to that the CC semi and Final, the great halting of a 40/20 and return upfield vs Wire that led to Hall scoring and then at Wembley he made a break that again led to Hall scoring. Not too shabby.

Post that we went 60 mins with 12 men a week after Wembley so a tough ask of the team who were just tying to cling on in that game and then he had the 2nd trail by social media thing hovering over his head. A more realistic view is that he had a bad/disappointing last 4 games of the season....not half a season at all.

I do actually agree he needs to improve his play with ball in hand when we get close to the opposition line.......but then again so do the whole team? How would Hardaker's numbers for tries and assists look if we had an improved attacking structure across the whole field?

his defense is based on technique, im still not sure why you think its based on physicality?
do you think he physically overpowers people in order to stop tries, rather than getting himself in fantastic positions and using skill to get underneath the ball/force the ball out?


whose are, then? or are attacking runs something that you think are based only on physicallity?
his step and change of pace, are they not skills?


no i didnt, its just something that wasnt raised in any of your posts
i could probably think of a couple of times where zak may have made defensive mistakes
i could probably think of a dozen, if not more, where his last ditch tackles saved tries, not to mention the number of times he took challenged high balls incredibly well



when you look at the stat 'per game', rather than by 'per carry' it paints a diferent picture though, doesnt it?
Wellens made 15 try assists in 26 games, (with some games played at half back) Hardaker made 13 try assists in 21 games.
Hardaker made 102 tackle busts in 21 game, Dorn made 56 in 18 but has a better busts/carry average? LOL
didnt Godinet play hooker of the bench for most of the season bench too?




the stats im looking at dont support that at all, i guess because im not looking at 'stat per carry'.
he made 13 try assists and scored 8 tries, which seems about right - he scored or assisted a try on average in every game he played for us
the attacking play i see from him, couple with the (easily best in the league) defensive full back abilities make him for me the best in league at his position.
could he improve in attack? certainly. he cant throw that cut out pass like Webb could, but who in the league can?


his passing is certainly not the best for a full back, i agree. but i dont think he's really had chance to properly display his kicking or creativity yet given his role/position, but again it is probably still raw compared to most half backs.

i believe all things considered he's the best full back in the league, if you disagree then that's fine.
i know i wouldnt swap him for any other full back in the league right now, and i believe he's still going to get even better.
lets hope we can get him signed up for a few more years yet so we can find out

Really? If so they were very few and far between.


We are on about Hardaker here aren't we? Y'know, the lad who plays full back? You're not thinking of Ryan Hall?

Hardaker is a superb broken field runner and for that there is a certain amount of physicality required. A good proportion of the breaks he makes are against a retreating defence where he is pin pointing a tired defender and running through him - that requires a certain amount of physicality. Man on man defence he is as good as there is but to stop someone at full pace requires a combination of technique and physical strength - why does Ryan Hall score so many tries even against the best FBs in the world?

Printer is correct in pointing out his personal issues last season and how they may have impacted his form but they were in part self inflicted and that propensity for self destruction should not be discounted when looking at player. He may be great but if he is suspended for 20% of the season that isn't helpful

The second half of the season stats you produced showed his best performances were against 3 of the 4 worst sides in SL he stats against the likes of Saints, Wigan and Catalans weren't so hot? That for me is the real test how does he perform against the best sides?

There really is no hope or pleasing some moribund pessimists on here.



Of all the players' positions that could be considered in need of improvement with a healthier upgrade (halfback and hooker) some have to focus their negativity onto one of our better more valuable players.
As for his skills or supposed lack of them, some of my highlights from last season were Hardaker's beating of Sarginson at HQ, and his beautifully timed tackles on Bowen, Escare and Evans. Physicality indeed

Like you agreed with, the 2nd homophobic incident looked to have impacted his form for those remaining games vs Wigan and Catalans.

Earlier in the year he ran for over 200m vs both, scored one of the best individual tries from a Leeds player this year against Wigan and assisted one vs Catalans.....he also scored twice in the cup win over Saints.

Let's just establish a couple of things before we go around the houses once again.

1. Hardaker is a very good asset for Leeds and I am not suggesting otherwise. Neither am I suggesting we should swop him or drop him.

2. The discussion was about the claim that ZH is the best FB in SL and also that he should be moved up to SO. Therefore my comments should be taken in this context as an alternative view.

3. Fullback is regarded as one of the real key positions and one that presents some of the best attacking opportunities to create position and space for scoring chances. ZH does create good field position but so often this comes to nothing because he chose not to use an overlap or chose to try and beat another man when a pass would have been better for the team.

3. My use of the word physicality is not meant to denigrate ZH. Rugby is one of the most physical games in the world so having physicality is a great asset. Hardaker's fullback style is in the same mould as Kenny (Bucket) Thornett one of my boyhood heros in our first championship winning side in 1961. He is also in the mould of Wellans another full back whose game is based on physicality but who developed the creative side of his game. However as my rugby experience and tastes matured, I came to appreciate the subtler fullback skills of the likes of ET, Homes, Harris, Webb, Slater & Inglis ( the latter combines great physicality with great skill too). I do believe that ZH's current game is based on great physicality and very good work rate but is deficient in other key skills IMO.




My criticism of his defense is a bit picky and was not in my original comments (see point 2 above)







Stats per game is interesting but without knowing the minutes played is flawed.
Eg1: a winger might have no passes whatsoever in a game and to discredit his try scoring ability on his stat for that game would not be fair.

Eg2 a forward who only comes on for 10 minutes will have poor stats per game but may have made big meters per carry. tackle busts and clean breaks per carry.

Therefore a better and fairer evaluation is by using 'per carry' stat which shows a players effectiveness with hands on the ball.

eg1: ZH made a try assist every 30.76 carries while Escare is every 17.75, Eden every 17.89, Rankin every 15.9 and Wellans every 15.66

eg2: ZH made a tackle bust every 3.88 carries (note his strong suit) while Escare made one TB every 2.78 carries, Bowen 3.2, Dorn 3.5, Russell 3.57

eg3: ZH scored a try evey 50 carries, while Escare scored a try every 10.5 carries, Dorn 12.25, Owens 18.5, Wellans 19.58, Shaul 22.37, Hanbury 22.66, Rankin 23, Grix 29, Mathers 30, Eden 30.9, Bowen 30.9 and Lomas 45 (who missed half the season)

Most of the players will have played in another position at some stage during the season.




I agree on the first point but have reservations regarding you other points. We shall see,



I would agree he is one of the best in SL but I do not think any of us can be a fair judge as we only see glimpses of the other contenders.

I think that Watkins could be an outstanding attacking FB as IMO he would revel in the extra space and opportunities that this position would give him compared with the restraints of the modern day centre position.

im not gonna address all of your post, just this bit

not really, we're talking about full backs arent we, so i'd assume most full backs played full back for all the game.
wouldnt it follow that stats per game would make sense then?

if you've picked players who played lots of game time in other positions, then its just a bad comparison isnt it.
i guess 'stats per game' are as flawed as comparing a full backs stats to a rotational hooker's in an effort to make some weird point about Hardaker.

if youre going to do 'stats per carry' why dont you at least include the number of carries and give them some context.

Hardaker made 400 carries, scored 8 tries and made 13 try assists
Russell made 382 carries, scored 3 tries and made 3 try assists

his attacking efficiency shouldnt be conisdered independant of his work rate and role in the team.


also, you said you agreed with Sal that there are 3/4 full backs better than Hardaker in the league
did you agree with him that one was matty russell? lol
if not, could you please name who you think are the better full backs? or did you mean there's 3 or 4 'better passers of the ball' playing at full back in the league?

Good old JC only using stats that back his claim yet the only stat that really counts is what happens over the whole 80 minutes RL is an 80 minute sport not a per carry one.
Also re-him possibly moving to SO he adapted to FB and i personally think he could adapt/develop into a 6 after listening to Daryl Powell and watching the kid since he joined us.
Is he perfect in all facets of the game no but who is in SL?

Everyone on here uses stats that suits their argument that's the skill in debate don't see you picking up on Printer selective use of Zac's better stats at the start of the season when it didn't really matter against his stats at the business end of the season?