Rumours and Stuff

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

It's got to do with way more then defense. You just need to watch us play in that last Roosters game and it reveals everything.

We have no chance as long as BA is the head coach.

And yet, we're the only team that has beaten Penrith this year, and the only team other than Penrith and the Cowboys that has beaten Melbourne. Make it to the last 3 teams standing and we definitely have a chance. We might (or might not) f**k things up before then. But 'no chance'....that's just bluster.

But of course it's easy to prophesise that a team has 'no chance' and appear correct...because 15 out of 16 teams don't win in any given year.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Currently every game for our team is a danger game.

And I agree we can not win the comp this year.

We can win the comp this year, it’s just unlikely. Rather than trying to turn it into a narrative (“We can’t win because…”) you need to include randomness in your understanding of the game. There are no foregone conclusions. If you win it doesn’t mean you were 100% chance of winning and if you lose it doesn’t mean you were no chance. To think so shows a lack of understanding of probability.

So if we need to win three consecutive (for a top four finish) or four consecutive (for 5th-8th) and our average probability of winning a given finals match is 45% (we don’t actually know the real chance and never will, so this 45% is just to illustrate the point) then our chances of winning the comp are about 9% for a top four finish and just over 4% for top eight. Obviously finishing 5th-8th increases your odds of winning the first match because you’re generally (not necessarily) up against an easier team.

But unless you consider your odds of winning any given finals match to be zero then it is demonstrably wrong to say we can’t win the comp this year. Who can’t we beat? Penrith? Melbourne? f**king Wests? We can beat any of them. It’s just that the odds of winning three straight games at finals time are so low that usually only the premiers manage it. The exception is when a team makes (and loses) the grand final from outside the top four.

 

[Gazzamatta]

And yet, we're the only team that has beaten Penrith this year, and the only team other than Penrith and the Cowboys that has beaten Melbourne. Make it to the last 3 teams standing and we definitely have a chance. We might (or might not) f**k things up before then. But 'no chance'....that's just bluster.

But of course it's easy to prophesise that a team has 'no chance' and appear correct...because 15 out of 16 teams don't win in any given year.

Finishing in the top 4 is a huge challenge for our inconsistent, poor for and against team. Failing that its 3 tough games in a row to even make the GF. I guess it starts this week but it appears a stretch.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

And yet, we're the only team that has beaten Penrith this year, and the only team other than Penrith and the Cowboys that has beaten Melbourne. Make it to the last 3 teams standing and we definitely have a chance. We might (or might not) f**k things up before then. But 'no chance'....that's just bluster.

But of course it's easy to prophesise that a team has 'no chance' and appear correct...because 15 out of 16 teams don't win in any given year.

Yep, it’s the coward’s prediction. What odds would any merkin offer for a team to not win the comp in a given year? Even Panthers are still paying $2.40 for the win. That means them not winning is the more likely scenario. As for us, we are paying $11. Pretty long odds for anyone to say we will win. Therefore it’s easy to say we won’t. Imagine a team was paying $11 for a win this weekend. What kind of blowhard would think they’re smart for saying they won’t win.

 

[TheRam]

And yet, we're the only team that has beaten Penrith this year, and the only team other than Penrith and the Cowboys that has beaten Melbourne. Make it to the last 3 teams standing and we definitely have a chance. We might (or might not) f**k things up before then. But 'no chance'....that's just bluster.

But of course it's easy to prophesise that a team has 'no chance' and appear correct...because 15 out of 16 teams don't win in any given year.

I suppose we could do a Bradbury so anything is possible from that perspective, but from a more realistic perspective we have Buckley's chance of winning 4 straight games in the finals series. This coach just can't do that. Period!

 

[TheRam]

Yep, it’s the coward’s prediction. What odds would any merkin offer for a team to not win the comp in a given year? Even Panthers are still paying $2.40 for the win. That means them not winning is the more likely scenario. As for us, we are paying $11. Pretty long odds for anyone to say we will win. Therefore it’s easy to say we won’t. Imagine a team was paying $11 for a win this weekend. What kind of blowhard would think they’re smart for saying they won’t win.

That's the point genius, we are way off the pace of a team that has any realistic chance of winning it, so for me the coach after 9 years is to blame for that and he himself has said so that it is his responsibility to be able to prepare them to be up for every encounter. He also believes that we have the team to win it and that if we play to our strengths that we can beat anyone.

So he knows that it is his job to get them in the right frame of mind for every game and so far he has failed to do that. So again how long do we give a guy that can't get them up for enough consecutive games to win it? We are just treading water at this stage. Next season, if he is still here, we will start swallowing it too.

And as much as that normally would sound appealing, unfortunately in this context it is also called drowning and slowly sinking.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Finishing in the top 4 is a huge challenge for our inconsistent, poor for and against team. Failing that its 3 tough games in a row to even make the GF. I guess it starts this week but it appears a stretch.

We certainly do have an issue with consistency. And we did last year too.....and improved a lot over the last third of the season. We could get better, we could get worse. This weekend is a tough game....it'd be good to see us keep Souths to < 20 points.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

I hope we win.

 

[84 Baby]

We certainly do have an issue with consistency. And we did last year too

Well that sounds like we don’t have a problem with consistency?

 

[emjaycee]

Well that sounds like we don’t have a problem with consistency?

Does being consistently inconsistent mean that we do have some consistency if only in our ability to be inconsistent?

 

[84 Baby]

Does being consistently inconsistent mean that we do have some consistency if only in our ability to be inconsistent?

I wish we were more inconsistent

 

[emjaycee]

I wish we were more inconsistent

Same.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

I disagree.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

That's the point genius, we are way off the pace of a team that has any realistic chance of winning it, so for me the coach after 9 years is to blame for that

Says who? This is likely as strong as we can get with our resources. Shuffling coaches on the Titanic won’t change that. There’s no magic formula to improve the team every year for nine years. The salary cap is a factor every single year. It doesn’t care how long your coach has been on the books.

and he himself has said so that it is his responsibility to be able to prepare them to be up for every encounter.

People in high paying management jobs have to say shit like this. It’s called extreme ownership. It’s a standard part of modern management culture. The reality is there’s plenty of stuff outside of your control, and you need to focus on what you can change.

He also believes that we have the team to win it and that if we play to our strengths that we can beat anyone.

Well he’s right, but as we saw in last years finals, even if we play our best we still might lose. That’s the part Arthur’s not allowed to say out loud.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Does being consistently inconsistent mean that we do have some consistency if only in our ability to be inconsistent?

I think for us, consistency would mean more wins against worse teams and fewer wins against better teams. It’s not exactly going to increase our chances of winning the comp.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Need more first half against Chooks.

 

[Oscarman]

So Lodge is signing with the Roosters for $100k. Nice discount on what anyone else was going to be put in the cap for.

 

[JokerEel]

So Lodge is signing with the Roosters for $100k. Nice discount on what anyone else was going to be put in the cap for.

Didn't the NRL claim he has to be paid at a minimum 20k per game? So he is only playing 5 games then.

 

[Noise]

Didn't the NRL claim he has to be paid at a minimum 20k per game? So he is only playing 5 games then.

Did the NRL say that or the media say that? I don’t remember any direct quotes from the NRL.

 

[the phantom menace]

Maybe it's having a bye week, but when you step back and look at things we're in equal fourth. Provided we beat South we're also a reasonable chance of becoming fourth on for and against - especially when the Broncos lose to the Cowboys this week, and the Sharks lose to teh Strom the following week.

We are four points clear of the closest teams (Souths and Dragons coming equal seventh) and also have one game in hand compared to the team coming third (Cows). On our day we can beat any of the teams in the top three, and if we finish the rounds in the top four we can even afford to lose against one of them in week one.

I've done the ladder predictor, and if we split the two games against Souths I have us finishing equal 4th with the Sharks, who are on comparable for and against. I have the Raiders pipping Souths for the final top 8 spot. We lose to Storm in fianls week one, beat the Sharks week two, face the Panthers in week three to come up against the Storm again in the Grand Final. It's doable...