Lafai Defense is like the lotteries

[True_Believer]

T

They can be dubious I agree, it’s not definitive. But the companies that compile the stats do try to include those misreads in the count. If a centre flies in and leaves his winger facing 2 players and misses the tackle, the try concede should go to the centre. And over the course of 24 games it’s much less likely lots of those will be mistakes.

Almost as dubious as "I've watched this game for 60 years so I know what I'm talking about". Love that people can argue against stats, but defend their ability to identify a good player based solely on them watching the game from the sidelines. Yes stats don't tell the whole story, but at least they are hard facts as opposed to a subjective "gut feel" from someone who has had nothing to do with the game at a professional level.

If stats mean nothing, why record them? Why have GPS trackers in their jerseys?

 

[The Damo]

Almost as dubious as "I've watched this game for 60 years so I know what I'm talking about". Love that people can argue against stats, but defend their ability to identify a good player based solely on them watching the game from the sidelines. Yes stats don't tell the whole story, but at least they are hard facts as opposed to a subjective "gut feel" from someone who has had nothing to do with the game at a professional level.

If stats mean nothing, why record them? Why have GPS trackers in their jerseys?

Yeah it’s a strange stubbornness. “Player x is terrible because he barely makes line breaks and his offloads are nonexistent”.
Is shown stats confirming player x is in the top ten for their position in both and well above the average.
“I don’t trust stats, and also I can just tell they are wrong and also they are slow and where’s the stat for this other different criteria I just made up as important?”
They aren’t the be all and end all, and to really make use of them you need to break stuff down into per possession bits and Value over Average and various other analytical tools. All of which there’s plenty of people doing a much better job than I hav the skills or time to do.

 

[Dragonslayer]

Stats are the only tangible evidence that can be used to assess performance.

Outside if that it becomes too easy to be an armchair critic. There are so many intangibles that people watching the game can't or don't want to admit to. For example:

1. Player X has been instructed to play a certain way by the coach. He follows that instruction, but appearance wise he is doing nothing.
2. Comparing player X with player Y or Z is frought with so many variables including, style of play, offense/defense structures and momentum to bame a few.
3. Coach......i will leave it at that.
4. A thing i call "in the moment". A decision made by player X which at times can be brilliant or just plain stupid. Unfortunately, we tend to focus more heavily on the stupid decisions but again we are not in that moment.
5. Player bias. People naturally dislike player X because he doesnt do what they want him to do or perceive how a player should play.

The other thing I'd like to mention is the long range try thing. Our style of play from the back has never changed. Always one out, with either forwards, wingers or centres taking ut up 'til tackle 5 and then kick down field. Thats it. So where are these long range try's supposed to come from? Yesterday we saw what can happen if we support the ball runner, amazing wasnt it!

Stats can be manipulated to show anything you want really, they are not the b all or end all of a players performance, however, besides being an armchair critic what else is tangible evidence.

 

[possm]

Stats are the only tangible evidence that can be used to assess performance.

Outside if that it becomes too easy to be an armchair critic. There are so many intangibles that people watching the game can't or don't want to admit to. For example:

1. Player X has been instructed to play a certain way by the coach. He follows that instruction, but appearance wise he is doing nothing.
2. Comparing player X with player Y or Z is frought with so many variables including, style of play, offense/defense structures and momentum to bame a few.
3. Coach......i will leave it at that.
4. A thing i call "in the moment". A decision made by player X which at times can be brilliant or just plain stupid. Unfortunately, we tend to focus more heavily on the stupid decisions but again we are not in that moment.
5. Player bias. People naturally dislike player X because he doesnt do what they want him to do or perceive how a player should play.

The other thing I'd like to mention is the long range try thing. Our style of play from the back has never changed. Always one out, with either forwards, wingers or centres taking ut up 'til tackle 5 and then kick down field. Thats it. So where are these long range try's supposed to come from? Yesterday we saw what can happen if we support the ball runner, amazing wasnt it!

Stats can be manipulated to show anything you want really, they are not the b all or end all of a players performance, however, besides being an armchair critic what else is tangible evidence.

Well I'd say that Mary has the squad he wanted and Millward eagerly delivered it to him. Congratulations to both gentlemen.