Rd14 2024: Eels v Bulldogs GAME DAY THREAD @ Accor Stadium June 10th

[Incorrect]

When I saw my reflection in the telly watching Parra lose yet another game, I noticed my dome was looking very thin and shiney up top so I turned to Ashley and Martin.

What you experienced there was the textbook definition of "cause & effect"....

 

[Twizzle]

we can probably keep this thread going till we play the Doggies again

 

[JokerEel]

I wonder when the turning point was exactly?

Exactly at the 80th minute mark..

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You must watch the games in a very "special" way... fixated only on the scoreboard and after match stats - rather than detecting any nuances, shifts, momentum.

No wonder you were a Brad Arthur fanboy - he was also one dimensional, couldn't adapt or help the team adapt either .

He thinks there was only one momentum shift in the game and somehow I’m the special needs guy

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I wonder when the turning point was exactly?

There was only one apparently

 

[the phantom menace]

He thinks there was only one momentum shift in the game and somehow I’m the special needs guy

No he thinks our second half attack was a factor in why we lost just as much as our second half defence.

And yes, I think you have some very obvious unmet needs shining through with regularity...

 

[lucablight]

Nobody’s patting themselves on the back. Just stating the fact that we lost because of our defence, not because our attack wasn’t good enough.

They can both be valid reasons. If you don’t score more points than the opposition then your attack wasn’t good enough.

 

[Pazza]

It just stuns me that everytime we step on the field, we have 1 or 2 players who can't defend to an nrl level

 

[Poupou Escobar]

They can both be valid reasons. If you don’t score more points than the opposition then your attack wasn’t good enough.

No, it just might've been that your defence wasn't good enough. The Bulldogs don't concede a lot of tries (fewer than three per game), but against us they have conceded seven tries in two games. Of course two games isn't a big sample, but that means it's not a sufficient sample to say our attack isn't good enough. The larger sample of 13 games is better, but then it is skewed by missing our most important player for most of those games.

 

[lucablight]

No, it just might've been that your defence wasn't good enough. The Bulldogs don't concede a lot of tries (fewer than three per game), but against us they have conceded seven tries in two games. Of course two games isn't a big sample, but that means it's not a sufficient sample to say our attack isn't good enough. The larger sample of 13 games is better, but then it is skewed by missing our most important player for most of those games.

Well we’ve had our most important player back for the last two games and we’ve failed to ice them despite having more possession. The data seems to be trending in the direction I’m pointing to rather than yours.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Well we’ve had our most important player back for the last two games and we’ve failed to ice them despite having more possession. The data seems to be trending in the direction I’m pointing to rather than yours.

Instead of cherry picking a couple of games against top six sides, compare our results with Moses vs without him.

 

[lucablight]

Instead of cherry picking a couple of games against top six sides, compare our results with Moses vs without him.

I’m not cherry picking. I’m looking at the data as a whole. I acknowledge that Moses makes us a better team. I’m saying if our attack is so dandy then we shouldn’t be losing games despite dominating possession with him back in the side.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I’m not cherry picking. I’m looking at the data as a whole. I acknowledge that Moses makes us a better team. I’m saying if our attack is so dandy then we shouldn’t be losing games despite dominating possession with him back in the side.

His kicking and composure are part of why we are able to dominate possession. But the Roosters have the most attacking talent in the NRL and we couldn't stop them. Without 55% of the ball, it would've been over by half time.

Controlling the ball is something you do instead of taking risks. I put it to you that taking risks contributes to scoring points, and therefore controlling possession doesn't necessarily correlate with scoring more. We control the ball to benefit our defence, not our attack. You won't want to hear it, but we did well to hold the Chooks to 28 points. They are averaging more than that this year. Without our controlling the ball, who knows how many they would've scored.