Player: Metres - Carries (MT/Carry) - Tackles - Misses (Efficiency %) - Errors - Penalties Leeds: 1330 - 291 (4.57) - 297 - 27 (92%) - 11 - 8 Smith: 103 - 22 (4.68 ) - 2 - 5 (29%) - 0 - 0 Donald: 55 - 13 (4.23) - 1 - 1 (50%) - 0 - 0 Delaney: 105 - 16 (6.56) - 18 - 1 (95%) - 0 - 1 Senior: 101 - 18 (5.61) - 17 - 3 (85%) - 0 - 0 Hall: 148 - 17 (8.71) - 5 - 1 (83%) - 2 - 0 Sinfield: 96 - 42* (2.29) - 17 - 1 (94%) - 2 - 1 McGuire: 93 - 45* (2.07) - 12 - 1 (92%) - 1 - 0 Leuluai: 57 - 14 (4.07) - 25 - 2 (93%) - 1 - 0 Buderus: 37 - 12 (3.08 ) - 27 - 3 (90%) - 1 - 1 Peacock: 157 - 22 (7.14) - 29 - 2 (94%) - 1 - 0 Jones-Buchanan: 96 - 20 (4.80) - 32 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0 Ablett: 59 - 14 (4.21) - 21 - 1 (95%) - 1 - 2 Clarkson: 52 - 5 (10.40) - 27 - 2 (93%) - 0 - 0 McShane: 31 - 8 (3.88 ) - 14 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0 Lauitiiti: 46 - 7 (6.57) - 11 - 0 (100%) - 1 - 2 Kirke: 31 - 6 (5.17) - 19 - 3 (86%) - 1 - 1 Burgess: 63 - 10 (6.30) - 20 - 1 (95%) - 0 - 0 *=#FF0000Please Note: For reasons best known to Opta (and as far as I can tell) they have altered the way they count the carries made by the half-backs this week. In doing so they have totally distorted the carry and average meters made stats for the individuals concerned and the team totals also. Try Assists: Kevin Sinfield (Chris Clarkson try) Ryan Hall (Danny McGuire try) Previous Rounds: [size=50Crusaders (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=444197 Castleford (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=444160 Wakefield (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=445241 Salford (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=446124 Harlequins (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=447962 Huddersfield (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=448906 Hull KR (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=449954 Wigan (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=450842 Bradford (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=451765 Les Catalans (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=452156 Hull (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=452863 St Helens (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=454630 Wakefield (N) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=455376 Warrington (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=456928 Bradford (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=457737 Wakefield (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=459329 Harlequins (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=460069 Crusaders (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=460764 Warrington (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=461386 St Helens (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=462048 Hull KR (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=462717 [/size

Player: Metres - Carries (MT/Carry) - Tackles - Misses (Efficiency %) - Errors - Penalties Leeds: 1330 - 291 (4.57) - 297 - 27 (92%) - 11 - 8 Smith: 103 - 22 (4.68 ) - 2 - 5 (29%) - 0 - 0 Donald: 55 - 13 (4.23) - 1 - 1 (50%) - 0 - 0 Delaney: 105 - 16 (6.56) - 18 - 1 (95%) - 0 - 1 Senior: 101 - 18 (5.61) - 17 - 3 (85%) - 0 - 0 Hall: 148 - 17 (8.71) - 5 - 1 (83%) - 2 - 0 Sinfield: 96 - 42* (2.29) - 17 - 1 (94%) - 2 - 1 McGuire: 93 - 45* (2.07) - 12 - 1 (92%) - 1 - 0 Leuluai: 57 - 14 (4.07) - 25 - 2 (93%) - 1 - 0 Buderus: 37 - 12 (3.08 ) - 27 - 3 (90%) - 1 - 1 Peacock: 157 - 22 (7.14) - 29 - 2 (94%) - 1 - 0 Jones-Buchanan: 96 - 20 (4.80) - 32 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0 Ablett: 59 - 14 (4.21) - 21 - 1 (95%) - 1 - 2 Clarkson: 52 - 5 (10.40) - 27 - 2 (93%) - 0 - 0 McShane: 31 - 8 (3.88 ) - 14 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0 Lauitiiti: 46 - 7 (6.57) - 11 - 0 (100%) - 1 - 2 Kirke: 31 - 6 (5.17) - 19 - 3 (86%) - 1 - 1 Burgess: 63 - 10 (6.30) - 20 - 1 (95%) - 0 - 0 *=#FF0000Please Note: For reasons best known to Opta (and as far as I can tell) they have altered the way they count the carries made by the half-backs this week. In doing so they have totally distorted the carry and average meters made stats for the individuals concerned and the team totals also. Try Assists: Kevin Sinfield (Chris Clarkson try) Ryan Hall (Danny McGuire try) Previous Rounds: [size=50Crusaders (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=444197 Castleford (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=444160 Wakefield (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=445241 Salford (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=446124 Harlequins (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=447962 Huddersfield (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=448906 Hull KR (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=449954 Wigan (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=450842 Bradford (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=451765 Les Catalans (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=452156 Hull (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=452863 St Helens (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=454630 Wakefield (N) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=455376 Warrington (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=456928 Bradford (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=457737 Wakefield (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=459329 Harlequins (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=460069 Crusaders (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=460764 Warrington (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=461386 St Helens (H) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=462048 Hull KR (A) - viewtopic.php?f=17&t=462717 [/size

Player: Metres - Carries (MT/Carry) - Tackles - Misses (Efficiency %) - Errors - Penalties

Huddersfield: 1192 - 225 (5.30) - 346 - 17* (95%) - 14 - 6

Grix: 97 - 15 (6.47) - 6 - 3 (67%) - 2 - 0

Cudjoe: 110 - 15 (7.33) - 9 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0
Lawrence: 87 - 14 (6.21) - 28 - 1 (97%) - 0 - 0
Gilmore: 20 - 3 (6.67) - 24 - 1 (96%) - 2 - 1
Hodgson: 74 - 13 (5.69) - 8 - 1 (89%) - 0 - 0

Brown: 29 - 18 (1.61) - 21 - 0 (100%) - 1 - 0
Robinson: 47 - 32 (1.47) - 27 - 2 (93%) - 1 - 0

Crabtree: 107 - 18 (5.94) - 26 - 0 (100%) - 0 - 0
Brough: 56 - 18 (3.11) - 15 - ? (??%) - 0 - 0
Griffin: 121 - 14 (8.64) - 16 - 1 (94%) - 0 - 2
Finnigan: 52 - 9 (5.78 ) - 35 - 3 (92%) - 2 - 1
Wild: 24 - 4 (6.00) - 41 - 2 (95%) - 1 - 2
Faiumu: 84 - 13 (6.46) - 27 - 0 (100%) - 1 - 0

Lunt: 103 - 11 (9.36) - 23 - 1 (96%) - 2 - 0
Drew: 11 - 7 (1.57) - 5 - 0 (100%) - 1 - 0
Horne: 91 - 13 (7.00) - 17 - 1 (94%) - 1 - 0
Patrick: 79 - 8 (9.88 ) - 18 - 1 (95%) - 0 - 0

*=#FF0000Please Note: The Engage Super League site still has Danny Brough at Wakefield and have not updated any of his stats for sometime. The Huddersfield team total however does appear to include his stats from Friday's game at Headingley. Unfortunately as the team missed tackle stat is (and always has been) a nonsense they are missing from the player. The team missed tackle stat includes Brough's tackles (but not his misses if there were any?)

Some big meters in the back 5. Kirkes stats don't help his cause either

Something very odd going on there tvoc! What is the actual opta definition (if any) of a carry?

And how lazy does it make brown look by comparison

The fact that they have Ali and JJB down for zero missed tackles unfortunately does not say much about Opta. There was clearly missed tackles from both players.

Unfortunately for JJB he quite clearly went into that match unfit on Friday, and was a poor decision from the coach. Yet when he was forced to come back on due to other injuries, IMO he was the very reason we turned things round and won that match.

And for the benefit of rhinoms, those missed tackles are a clear indication of what I was saying on the other thread. Individuals seriously need to take a good hard look at themselves, because some of those stats are bordering on pathetic.


edit. Just noted they also only had Ablet down for one missed also. That is a joke.

Your guess is as good as mine unfortunately. I wish there was somewhere online to explain just how the stats are collected, defined and reproduced but I am unaware of any such explanation available.

What is pretty clear is that something has changed (in week 22 of 27) in the regard I highlighted in the opening post rendering comparison's to previous weeks even more irrelevant than usual and distorting the season averages.

If someone has access to one of the trade papers that carry the Opta Stats for all the SL games (I only deal with the Leeds stats (via the Engage SL site) and their opponents when I have time), perhaps they could check the other games for unreasonably high numbers of carries by half-backs at the weekend. It's possible at this stage that it's an isolated rogue occurrence.

There's nothing on there for my benefit!
Missed tackles don't show that we won against a play-off team whilst we showed no enthusiasm or hunger whatsoever which is what you stated!
I also didn't dispute about individuals performances either just that you can't win without any of the above you clearly stated we had none of!

From the rugby league express.....

Wigan v Warrington, half back stats.

Player: Metres - Carries (MT/Carry) - Tackles - Misses (Efficiency %) - Errors - Penalties
Tomkins - 53 -17 - (3.1)
Leuluai - 51 -14 - (3.6)

Briers - 25 - 18 - (1.3)
Myler - 12 - 6 - (2)

Not very high, comapred to ours. Hope this helps the logic.

Yes they look fairly average and reasonably consistent with previous half-back totals that you'd expect to see.

For instance Danny McGuire has recorded the following carries this season: 16 - 16 - 14 - 16 - 23 - 19 - 19 - 17 - 14 - 13 - 14 - =#FF00008 - 21 - 19 - 21 - 22 - 19 - 15 - 17 - 16 - =#FF000045

Two of those figures stand out. One pretty low and this weeks extraordinarily high.

Looks like some sort of balls-up then at opta! Surprise, surprise!

You would think that there must be some sort of agreed definition of exactly what they intend each stat gathered to actual show somewhere or other?

6 carries again by Kirke.

Though, in fairness as I wasn't in the country and didn't see the game I have no idea about the quality of the carries. I can easily imagine.

Still, by not carrying the ball in this week he saved enough energy to contribute 3 missed tackles, 1 error and 1 penalty.

Do I still have an agenda or do I have a point?

You'd of loved Kirke's tackling this week and Smithys cover tackling attempts!

You might have a point this week, don't know what relevance it is to previous weeks, but this week you might have a point.

What about Clarkson's 5 though?

As I said I wasn't in the country so didn't see the game.

As I've also said many times before the statistics are simply worthless raw data unless analysed in conjunction with observation of the game.

Where these statistics can prove useful is where they show a recurring pattern, which they seem to be doing with Kirke. This is is why previous games are informative.

Do I recall remember you saying you ran your own business once? If so, i hope it's a window cleaning round because your analytical skills are abysmal.

He even needed a ladder to do the downstairs........

Both

So here we are with G1 Fogknitting again.

Why can you not just answer a simple question without going round the houses and getting insulting?

Or have you actually in a backhanded way admitted you were wrong from the Saints stats thread and I missed it?

But just to remind ourselves. Against Saints Kirke was a softcock for doing only 6 carries in the game despite been a sub on the day. His defence was praised by others, but you put that down purely to the fact he was a lazy softcock from doing the carries.

Forget last week this been repeated by Bailey. I have now asked you about Clarkson. In this game he did 5 carries. Now you say you can't make comments without making observations whilst watching the game. Yet at the very very same time you have another go at Kirke despite admitting you were not there.



Lets remind ourselves:

Against Saints Kirkes Stats thay you had a go at were, 47 metres off 6 carries, 21 tackles with no misses, no errors and no penalties.

Against Huddersfield Clarksons stats were, 52 metres off 5 carries (which included 25 metres for the try from Sinfields pass), 27 tackles with 2 misses, no errors and no penalties.

Not a lot to choose between them. I should add here that I am in no way thinking Clarkson had a bad game, just highlighting the usual inconsistencies of a certain poster.

You might want Wheels to bump this again at some point, unless he is still doing that bottom licking impression.

Being.



Bump.

G1 is a lucky boy, have you seen my tongue?

I answered the questions you posted in the very next post. And don't go getting all precious about my insulting tone, hypocrite, because you're the worst for it. Just the other day you said of Brisbane Rhino, a poster who never indulges in any spats and simply comes on here top give a reasoned opinion, that he "might live a long way away but he doesn't have to live in the dark". All because he dared not to share the same bat loony tunes opinion you have.

Other posters have often called you on your hypocrisy when complaining about my tone to STFU with the holier than thou crap.

Now, that said, let's unwind the fog and get back to the discussion.

You've accused me of not answering your question. My bad. I thought I had. This was your post.




Two questions there. You question the relevance to previous weeks and ask me about Clarkson's 5 hit ups. Both were answered in the very next post.



I'll expand on the point I am making about Clarkson. Surely even you can understand the point I make about previous weeks.

I didn't see the game so cannot comment on the quality of Clarkson's hit ups or the quality of his tackles. I did not see how much aggression went into them. I did not see how the collision was dominated. I did not see how he controlled the ruck in each circumstance. All I can see is the raw numbers.

What I did see was the quality of his run for his try. I've never seen kirke hit a ball like that. Also, Kirke has now been a 1st team regular for five years. Clarkson is a kid who made his debut this year. Should they be comparable?

If you've seen the Clarkson try, I assume you've also now seen his and Buderus' initial tackle on Larne Patrick for his try?

Having commented on McShane's leaky defence at Hull KR it would be hypocritical of me not to also highlight that attempt by the first choice hooker.

Agreed it was a bad miss, maybe brought about through having to play when not fully fit due to his deputy (Diskin) not being fit & the then replacement/back-up hooker not being deemed good enough to play for the full 80 minutes or even a decent proportion thereof?

Forget it tvoc. It is yet another week where Gareth is been shown up.

If he just came out and admitted he got it wrong in the Saints stats thread, and then actually started posting things consistently, it could be let go.

But he just digs his hole more and more, and I sit here smugly laughing.



I have no idea what the rest of his post about insults its because it is just rubbish. Insults are personal not common phrases. He would do well to read and compare properly in future.

I know it is a bit of a come down to go from self proclaimed alpha male to runt of the litter.

I did, not good at all.

I thought about starting a thread asking what McShane will have learned from watching Buderus do that? It was followed up by equally poor efforts from Hall and Smith.

Still, Clarkson is a promising kid finding his feet in the 1st team and looking good doing so. Many posters on here will happily stick the knife in him for that miss yet find a plethora of reasons to forgive the vastly more experienced, vastly more experienced Buderus for his abysmal effort.