Team of 2006, Best of the Best

[mxlegend99]

Don't be f**king childish. We either have a decent argument or we delve into flaming and you aren't equipped to flame anyone.

That's funny coming from someone who quotes people then changes the contents off their posts. You're so mature.

Gordon has run for 1/2 the metres that Hayne has and has taken the ball up 1/2 as many times as Hayne.

And yet he still has almost as many tries and has more linebreaks. That's the whole point. :crazy:

Gordon isn't mentioned in anyone's team of the year in this thread, Hayne is.

But you know better and you know that Hayne isn't better than Gordon.

You're either biased or have no idea what you're talking about or both.

Funny how most people have put Merritt also. The 2 wingers with the most media coverage would be Hayne and Merritt. They get more attention then any other wingers.

So, you consider linebreaks more impressive than tries scored?

No. If you could read things in context you would see that i consider a player who receives half as many chances... but is still able to have more linebreaks and almost as many tries as doing more each time he touches the ball.

Are you re-reading what you write?

I have no need to re-read what i write. You just need to practice comprehension.

Then, without anyone mentioning it again, you posted the stats. Well, half the stats. Then when you were asked to provide all the stats you claimed they weren't there, when they were. Then you started on a rant as to why Hayne shouldn't be considered as one of the best wingers in the comp.

One of the best? Fair enough. Top 2? Hell no. It takes more then a few tries and a lot of metres gained in club footy to be the best winger, or one of them. I'm not trying to say Gordon is one of the best, i was simply stating that the alleged best in the competition is still behind in a few key areas to another rookie.

You're just wrong. Up to this point he most certainly is. The stats and the opinions here confirm that.

You still seem to miss the stat where Gordon has made more linebreaks with half the amount of ball and scored nearly as many tries. Ontop of having to defend by upto 4 times as much.

Carney's been better than both of them anyway, how is he not in that side.

I agree 100%. Although i think he is still behind a couple of fellas, he is a better winger then both Gordon and Hayne atm.

 

[mxlegend99]

Oh yeah. And if metres gained and tries scored are what makes a player better then another. Brett Stewart is the best fullback and Merritt is the best Winger. Since stats alone (atleast metres gained and tries according to yoy) determine who is better.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

That's funny coming from someone who quotes people then changes the contents off their posts. You're so mature.

So it's mature to change someone's post to "blah, blah, blah" etc?

Pot, kettle, black.

I am able to do this at any level you can think of, and then some.

You set the level.

And yet he still has almost as many tries and has more linebreaks. That's the whole point. :crazy:

I think you could be sitting on the point but you wouldn't have enough nous to look down, you'd just point to the fact that you can feel something that's relevant to the problem ....

Funny how most people have put Merritt also. The 2 wingers with the most media coverage would be Hayne and Merritt. They get more attention then any other wingers.

I knew you'd say that.

Merritt is absolutely starring for a side running last.

Hayne is starring for a team that was giving Merrit's team a run for its money.

Gordon is not starring for a team going nowhere.

And you wonder why those two are getting attention?

Do you understand that history books don't bother with wingers who make 10 tackles a game?

No. If you could read things in context you would see that i consider a player who receives half as many chances... but is still able to have more linebreaks and almost as many tries as doing more each time he touches the ball.

You keep saying the same things ad infinitum. You totally ignore the stats that show that Hayne is a much better winger than Gordon.

You've been doing it from post #1. As far as you're concerned, the fact that Gordon makes twice as many tackles as Hayne at 83% efficiency to Hayne's 75% and has made 3 linebreaks more with 6 tries less than Hayne makes him the equal of Hayne.

Yet obvious stuff like Hayne doing twice the hit-ups, twice the metres and more tries isn't relevant to you.

You just simply want to be critical of the bloke because you love Gordon. Not that there's anything wrong with that.....

I have no need to re-read what i write. You just need to practice comprehension.

no, you think you have no need to re-read it. What you need to do is re-read it with someone else's eyes.

One of the best? Fair enough. Top 2? Hell no. It takes more then a few tries and a lot of metres gained in club footy to be the best winger, or one of them. I'm not trying to say Gordon is one of the best, i was simply stating that the alleged best in the competition is still behind in a few key areas to another rookie.

Hayne is in the top 2 in plenty of opinions here. Not in yours? Fine, but ther was no need to denigrate other and Hayne because you disagree.

You've made a few blanket statements and haven't backed them up enough to convince one single unbiased supporter that your opinion is correct.

You still seem to miss the stat where Gordon has made more linebreaks with half the amount of ball and scored nearly as many tries.

How do you figure nearly?

9 from 12

v

15 from 12

Hayne scores on average in 100% of games in his NRL career, Gordon scores in 74% of games in his career so far.

Hayne's percentage is far better than Gordon's percentage lead in effective tackles.

Ontop of having to defend by upto 4 times as much.

Again, you just don't seem to grasp the stupidity of that statement, in the context of this argument.

It's isn't Hayne's fault that Gordon has to defend more than him. It is Gordon's fault that he touches the ball 1/2 as much as Hayne.

You will happily accept one stat as relevant and won't accept the other, that happens to favour Hayne, as relevant.

Gordon just doesn't go looking for the pill like Hayne does.

 

[mxlegend99]

So it's mature to change someone's post to "blah, blah, blah" etc?

Pot, kettle, black.

I am able to do this at any level you can think of, and then some.

You set the level.

I just cut back the contents of the post because it was about 50 paragraphs long. You changed the contents to be insulting. WHich is childish?

Merritt is absolutely starring for a side running last.

Hayne is starring for a team that was giving Merrit's team a run for its money.

Meritt is starring in a side that has not won games.

Hayne is starring in a side that has won 9 games out of the 12 he has been their.

Gordon is not starring for a team going nowhere.

9 tries. 13 linebreaks. God knows how many try-assists. Tackling his butt off each week. He's doing a lot of work. And he is starring. You don't see him getting credit for things like chasing down Matt Bowen after a linebreak etc. Not many players could do that in any position.

Do you understand that history books don't bother with wingers who make 10 tackles a game?

Do you understand that they don't bother with wingers that make 500metres and 200 hit-ups a game either? Tries and linebreaks are the 2 biggest stats for any position. Along with Try-Assits and Linebreak Assists.

You keep saying the same things ad infinitum. You totally ignore the stats that show that Hayne is a much better winger than Gordon.

Wrong. You ignore the fact that his twice as many metres and few extra tries come along with the fact he has more then twice as many opportunities as Gordon. Hayne is in a team that uses the backs very havily to get metres. Gordon is in a team that uses their forwards. Yet Gordon still holds his own in some stats and has the advantage in others.

You've been doing it from post #1. As far as you're concerned, the fact that Gordon makes twice as many tackles as Hayne at 83% efficiency to Hayne's 75% and has made 3 linebreaks more with 6 tries less than Hayne makes him the equal of Hayne.

Yet obvious stuff like Hayne doing twice the hit-ups, twice the metres and more tries isn't relevant to you.

I'm not saying that it isn't relevent. I'm saying that every run Gordon has, is just as efficient as every run Hayne has... if not moreso. In less runs he has morelinbreaks. In half the amount of runs he has over half the amount of tries etc. You're the one saying Gordon does nothing... yet considering how little ball he has received, he is still winning in some stats, and equal in others. Yes Hayne has gained more metres and had more runs. The only one of our backs that has a lot of runs is Wesser. Other then that our metres are gained through our forwards.You said you watch Panthers games, you should know this.

Hayne is in the top 2 in plenty of opinions here. Not in yours? Fine, but ther was no need to denigrate other and Hayne because you disagree.

The majority of people think the 2 best wingers are the 2 wingers with the most coverage from the media. I guarantee that you put those 2 wingers on 1 team against say Tate and Grothe.... that Tate and Grothe would get the better of Hayne and Merritt. My arguement has never been that Gordon is the best winger... my arguement has always been that Hayne is a great rookie winger, but is overhyped. I'm not trying to say that Gordon is the player that Hayne is hyped to be... but that neither player is. :roll:

It's isn't Hayne's fault that Gordon has to defend more than him. It is Gordon's fault that he touches the ball 1/2 as much as Hayne.

Yeah, it's Gordons fault that the centre inside him doesn't pass him the ball very often. It is Haynes fault that he doesn't make many tackles. Gordon is always marking players and making tackles that he didn't need to make. They don't always run at him. He runs at them. You can't say that Hayne has no control over how many tackles he makes and that Gordon DOES have control over how much ball he gets. Sure he could probably chase more kicks... but if a ball is kicked to Wesser, what the hell is Gordon meant to do? He has to rely on other people getting it to him. Or wait out of position for the ball.

A player is directly responsible for how many tackles they make. They aren't directly responsible for how many times they get the ball.

Gordon just doesn't go looking for the pill like Hayne does.

Our backs don't see much ball at all. Gordon probably doesn't look for the ball as much as Hayne does.... but at the same time, he hasn't got the same opportunities he does. When we're in possession, our forwards are running the ball.

edit
BTW:

Oh yeah. And if metres gained and tries scored are what makes a player better then another. Brett Stewart is the best fullback and Merritt is the best Winger. Since stats alone (atleast metres gained and tries according to yoy) determine who is better.

Is that a safe assumption? Merritt is better then Hayne? Stewart has the best try scoring record of all the fullbacks.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Could you two please just exchange numbers and have it out over the phone. This will be better for everyone.

 

[Ice777]

Could you two please just exchange numbers and have it out over the phone. This will be better for everyone.

Or get a room :lol:

 

[mickdo]

Oh yeah. And if metres gained and tries scored are what makes a player better then another. Brett Stewart is the best fullback and Merritt is the best Winger. Since stats alone (atleast metres gained and tries according to yoy) determine who is better.

Actually, Merritt has scored 21 from 22 games, and Hayne 15 from 12, so Hayne has a better strike rate ;-)

here fishy, fishy...

 

[mxlegend99]

Actually, Merritt has scored 21 from 22 games, and Hayne 15 from 12, so Hayne has a better strike rate ;-)

here fishy, fishy...

Technically speaking, the strike rates for Merritt and Hayne since Hayne played his first game are:

Merritt = 1 try every 7.69 runs (100 runs for 13 tries)
Hayne = 1 try every 10.333 runs (155 runs for 15 tries)

Well... for strike rates. Merritt is doing quiet well for himself

I'm not very good at fishing

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

I just cut back the contents of the post because it was about 50 paragraphs long. You changed the contents to be insulting. WHich is childish?

Changing posts isn't just childish, it's against the rules of the forum and not something I'll normally do, unless it's a parameter set by the adversary.

That'd be you in this one.

In the context of this debate, it was very childish, I was just proving that even when it comes to childishness, you'll come second.

Meritt is starring in a side that has not won games.

But you're claiming Gordon is as good as Hayne because he is in a less successful side?

By that standard, Merritt is a Football God.

Hayne is starring in a side that has won 9 games out of the 12 he has been their.

Any other pearls of wisdom you'd like to impart Captain Obvious?

9 tries. 13 linebreaks. God knows how many try-assists. Tackling his butt off each week. He's doing a lot of work. And he is starring. You don't see him getting credit for things like chasing down Matt Bowen after a linebreak etc. Not many players could do that in any position.

Wingers and try assists. Can't imagine he's doing much damage there. How many tries has his centre scored?

What work?

Defensive work, yes, agreed.

Attacking work?

No.

Not even close to Hayne.

Do you understand that they don't bother with wingers that make 500metres and 200 hit-ups a game either? Tries and linebreaks are the 2 biggest stats for any position. Along with Try-Assits and Linebreak Assists.

He scores tries too, 15 in 12 matches.

Linebreaks?

I've got a few history book and I can't recall any one of them mentioning Line breaks.

Same with try assists.

By the way, Gordon seems to be missing from the NRL's try assist list which ends at 11. Maybe a quick call is in order?

Tries, that's the stat the history books remember.

Wrong. You ignore the fact that his twice as many metres and few extra tries come along with the fact he has more then twice as many opportunities as Gordon. Hayne is in a team that uses the backs very havily to get metres. Gordon is in a team that uses their forwards. Yet Gordon still holds his own in some stats and has the advantage in others.

So, the reason Gordon is so good is not the reason Merritt is good?

Players make their opportunities.

Gordon has 9 tries, Hayne has 15 according to NRL.com. That, is not "a few extra tries". You certainly don't call Gordon's lead in line breaks "a few extra line breaks".

I'm not saying that it isn't relevent. I'm saying that every run Gordon has, is just as efficient as every run Hayne has... if not moreso. In less runs he has morelinbreaks. In half the amount of runs he has over half the amount of tries etc. You're the one saying Gordon does nothing... yet considering how little ball he has received, he is still winning in some stats, and equal in others. Yes Hayne has gained more metres and had more runs. The only one of our backs that has a lot of runs is Wesser. Other then that our metres are gained through our forwards.You said you watch Panthers games, you should know this.

Where have I said Gordon does nothing?

He has a great workrate in defence in most games but is not one to hit the ball up like Wingers are generally called on to do these days, which explains the vast difference in their hit up & metres gained stats.

Again, you're ignoring that Gordon has every opportunity to hit the ball up as much as Hayne, if he wants to. Unless John Lang is forbidding him to take pressure off the Forwards?

The majority of people think the 2 best wingers are the 2 wingers with the most coverage from the media. I guarantee that you put those 2 wingers on 1 team against say Tate and Grothe.... that Tate and Grothe would get the better of Hayne and Merritt. My arguement has never been that Gordon is the best winger... my arguement has always been that Hayne is a great rookie winger, but is overhyped. I'm not trying to say that Gordon is the player that Hayne is hyped to be... but that neither player is. :roll:

All you do is sell everyone who thinks they've been the standout Wingers this season short.

You're just plain arrogant.

Yeah, it's Gordons fault that the centre inside him doesn't pass him the ball very often. It is Haynes fault that he doesn't make many tackles. Gordon is always marking players and making tackles that he didn't need to make. They don't always run at him. He runs at them. You can't say that Hayne has no control over how many tackles he makes and that Gordon DOES have control over how much ball he gets. Sure he could probably chase more kicks... but if a ball is kicked to Wesser, what the hell is Gordon meant to do? He has to rely on other people getting it to him. Or wait out of position for the ball.

That's just stupid waffle.

Does he wrap around Wesser on kick returns like Hayne does?

Does he hit the ball up to take pressure off the forwards?

Does he make 10 metres on average per run, runs that include every facet of attacking play?

If the answer is no to all those questions, Gordon isn't as good as you think he is.

You claim that Gordon doesn't get the ball as much as Hayne then offer every excuse under the sun from the Forwards hog the ball to the effects of global warming.

He doesn't get it as much because he doesn't want to get it as much.

A player is directly responsible for how many tackles they make. They aren't directly responsible for how many times they get the ball.

They are responsible for how many times they get the ball. There isn't a successful team I can think of in the last few years that hasn't had two wingers who hit the ball up more than Gordon. Daniel Fitzhenry would cover him on that stat, easily.

Defence isn't the Winger's first priority and if it is at Penrith, it's little wonder that Mr. Lang has been bulleted.

Our backs don't see much ball at all. Gordon probably doesn't look for the ball as much as Hayne does.... but at the same time, he hasn't got the same opportunities he does. When we're in possession, our forwards are running the ball.

Do you really think Hayne wouldn't score a load of tries playing in a team with Gower and Campbell?

BTW:

Is that a safe assumption? Merritt is better then Hayne? Stewart has the best try scoring record of all the fullbacks.

I'm not prepared to vote against Merritt, he has been phenomenal in a team that has won sweet FA games.

Maybe you should do his stats too and convince everyone that Gordon is better than him?

Merritt has 21 tries and 21 line breaks....playing for Souths....just quietly...

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Could you two please just exchange numbers and have it out over the phone. This will be better for everyone.

Just ignore the posts, it's not that difficult.

I generally ignore yours, so it can be done.

 

[mxlegend99]

Wingers and try assists. Can't imagine he's doing much damage there. How many tries has his centre scored?

He does more work with Rhys Wesser then he does with Danny Galea. Danny Galea is not fast enough to keep up with Gordon after a break.

He scores tries too, 15 in 12 matches.

Linebreaks?

I've got a few history book and I can't recall any one of them mentioning Line breaks.

Same with try assists.

Ahhh, so that makes those stats irrelevant? Linebreaks and Try-Assists are both very crucial parts of football. A linebreak is more important then a hitup.

He has a great workrate in defence in most games but is not one to hit the ball up like Wingers are generally called on to do these days, which explains the vast difference in their hit up & metres gained stats.

Correct. Although Panthers haven't changed their football since 2003. Generally our wingers are used to complete something near the tryline. Otherwise if you aren't one of our forwards... or Rhys Wesser, you won't see the ball all that often. Our halves get the ball and pass straight to a forward. Our first 3 or 4 runs our wingers and even centres have no way of getting the ball short of leaving their positions and going in and running directly off our halves.

Again, you're ignoring that Gordon has every opportunity to hit the ball up as much as Hayne, if he wants to. Unless John Lang is forbidding him to take pressure off the Forwards?

How exactly is he meant to do this? By playing more infield? Leaving his wing open? Campbell and Gower aren't looking at the outside till tackle 4 or 5. It's the way Panthers play. Wesser gets a lot of ball as he gets to run it straight up without leaving his position.

All you do is sell everyone who thinks they've been the standout Wingers this season short.

You're just plain arrogant.

Uhuh. I'm arrogant. You're the one who makes the claim that the only stats that count are the ones that go in Haynes favour. And then you refuse to accept that the teams in which the play are going to change how often they see the ball. You also refuse to give Gordon the credit of having more linebreaks... and more then half as many tries with less then half the amount of ball. Obviously his runs are more efficient.

Does he wrap around Wesser on kick returns like Hayne does?

Wesser dodges and weaves players and when it's down Gordons side of the field, Gordon trails him. Although he doesn't offload much. But he has gotten a few tries and gone close a few times from Wesser. Wesser doesn't have the best passing game though... that was evident in Origin 3. So i would say yes he trails Wesser when he has the chance to. Rooney would probably like to except he's not quiet as quick as Wesser... and would only see him for a second or 2.

Does he make 10 metres on average per run, runs that include every facet of attacking play?

Yes he does. You posted that stats.
91 runs.
934 metres.

934/91 = 10.26 metres per run.
91/13 linebreaks = 1 linebreak every 7 runs
91/9 tries = 1 try every 10.111 runs (and Hayne was 1 try every 10.333 runs)

I think he is a very efficient attacker when he has the ball.

If the answer is no to all those questions, Gordon isn't as good as you think he is.

Uhhhh. The answer was yes though. He has a good try scoring rate for each run. A great linebreak rate and a good metres per run rate.

You claim that Gordon doesn't get the ball as much as Hayne then offer every excuse under the sun from the Forwards hog the ball to the effects of global warming.

Panthers use their forwards for their attack. This is a well known fact. Our backs get involved when we're in the opponents territory. Wesser is the only back that ever sees any ball in our own half. This is not Gordons fault. He has no control over who Priddis, Gower and Campbell pass to. Sure he could leave his wing and run it up the middle. But he would just be a winger playing at fullback then.

Defence isn't the Winger's first priority and if it is at Penrith, it's little wonder that Mr. Lang has been bulleted.

Why? Wing defence is something we need to improve on immensely. Look at our friggen tries conceded down that wing. Campbell on the wing in defence is the worst move ever. When a kick goes to the wing, he gets outjumped with ease. When a big player runs at him, he gets by with ease.

Defence is one of the most important areas of the game. For any player. A winger *shouldnt* have to make so many tackles. But at the same time, if he is going to have a player run at him that many times, his first priority is to tackle him. In Round 9 he had to make 30 tackles and made 2 mistackles. That was against the Cowboys. Their wingers aren't players you want to mistackle either.

Do you really think Hayne wouldn't score a load of tries playing in a team with Gower and Campbell?

Ofcourse he would. But he wouldn't score as many as he currently does. He wouldn't see as much ball with us. We rarely offload. We don't play the ball to our backs very often. And our attack compared to the Eels is seriously lacking. Hayne would still be a try-scoring machine. But no one can say either way if he'd be as good, better or worse then Gordon for the Panthers. I can say that if Gordon got the ball as often as Hayne did... he would easily have a lot more metres gained, more linebreaks and more tries then he currently does. With any luck we get to see that next year when Matt Elliott is our coach. Panthers have one of the forward packs with the most metres gained this year... but with our backs doing far less work then other teams in attack, we aren't winning games.

I'm not prepared to vote against Merritt, he has been phenomenal in a team that has won sweet FA games.

Maybe you should do his stats too and convince everyone that Gordon is better than him?

Merritt has 21 tries and 21 line breaks....playing for Souths....just quietly...

I'm well aware of that. He has a better try scoring rate for each run then both Hayne and Gordon. Not just by a bit, by a lot. He sees less ball, and gets more tries. Incredible. Although his defence is really weak.

This is getting kind've tiring. You seem to think that a winger is responsible for how often they touch the ball, when the halves and hooker determine who receives the ball more often then not. Ours pass to forwards. It's easy to say that Gordon could go looking for the ball more. But short of running onto it as though he is a forward... unless he gets the halves to specifically send it his way, it won't happen. Wesser sees a lot of ball as he runs up like the forwards do. That's the beauty of being a fullback. Look how much Hodges attack has increased when he didn't have to stick to his wing and could run up when he felt like it.... he gained 346 metres in one match. He was never near that while playing centre.

 

[mxlegend99]

Well, i'm leaving this arguement. I've said what i've wanted to say. You think Hayne is the best winger this year (or top 2)... good for you. Personally i'd take Tate and Grothe as my wingers. What those guys done in Origin was friggen incredible.

But that's my opinion. Nothing to do with bias at all. Grothe is an Eels player also. And Tate plays for 2 teams which i don't like (Broncos and QLD).

Also... i'd take Merritt for attack over both Hayne and Gordon... but for defence, i wouldn't let him near my team. A combination of both is better then great attack with no defence. That's my personal opinion. Obviously some people aren't concerned with defence.

 

[azza]

This is getting kind've tiring.

You're telling us...

 

[mickdo]

Anyone who puts Grothe's 2006 over Hayne's (short though it has been) just hasn't been watching football. When it comes to wingers, they are paid to score tries. Grothe 7 tries from 20 games (if you include origin), and Hayne 15 tries from 12. Nuff said.

 

[mxlegend99]

All players are paid to score tries (or atleast set them up). But there is more to footy then just scoring tries. Grothe is a better player then Hayne. Atleast currently, he is. If you used tries scored, one would also think that Merritt and Gordon are better wingers then Grothe. And that's simply not true.

 

[mickdo]

All players are paid to score tries (or atleast set them up). But there is more to footy then just scoring tries. Grothe is a better player then Hayne. Atleast currently, he is. If you used tries scored, one would also think that Merritt and Gordon are better wingers then Grothe. And that's simply not true.

I didn't say he wasn't a better player, but this thread is the Team of 2006, best of the best. Pretty well nobody has Johns in their teams because this year he has not played as well as Cronk, but they wouldn't say overall that Cronk was a better halfback than Joey just yet would they? Grothe's 2006 has been a bit dissappointing for mine, and obviously JT agrees given the way he was hooked on the weekend.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

He does more work with Rhys Wesser then he does with Danny Galea. Danny Galea is not fast enough to keep up with Gordon after a break.

Sorry to hear that, we're getting Galea next year.

So, it's Wesser's fault now that he doesn't see the ball enough?

Ahhh, so that makes those stats irrelevant? Linebreaks and Try-Assists are both very crucial parts of football. A linebreak is more important then a hitup.

Who said they were irrelevant?

When you first posted the stats, all you posted were defensive stats.

A line break is only more important than a hit up if the line break leads to a score. A line break is less important than a try.

Tries are more important than all the other stats. If a bloke can score 30 tries a season (which is about Hayne's current strike rate) in the NRL, in defence he can sit near the goal posts having a smoke.

Correct. Although Panthers haven't changed their football since 2003. Generally our wingers are used to complete something near the tryline. Otherwise if you aren't one of our forwards... or Rhys Wesser, you won't see the ball all that often. Our halves get the ball and pass straight to a forward. Our first 3 or 4 runs our wingers and even centres have no way of getting the ball short of leaving their positions and going in and running directly off our halves.

So it is John Lang's fault....

How exactly is he meant to do this? By playing more infield? Leaving his wing open? Campbell and Gower aren't looking at the outside till tackle 4 or 5. It's the way Panthers play. Wesser gets a lot of ball as he gets to run it straight up without leaving his position.

* Wingers in most teams do it. Grothe and Hayne do it every game. They go to dummy half on tackle one and/or two and and hit the ball up, mainly from kick returns. And if you notice the pack tiring, they'll do it later in the count and more often too. It's been a standard strategy for more teams than not.

Uhuh. I'm arrogant.

Did I stutter?

You're the one who makes the claim that the only stats that count are the ones that go in Haynes favour.

err, no.

You were the one who posted only the defensive stats then I had to post the offensive stats because you claimed you couldn't find them.

And then you refuse to accept that the teams in which the play are going to change how often they see the ball.

*

You also refuse to give Gordon the credit of having more linebreaks... and more then half as many tries with less then half the amount of ball. Obviously his runs are more efficient.

You keep saying I don't give Gordon credit, this isn't about giving Gordon credit, it's about you taking credit away from Hayne.

Gordon has more linebreaks because he only runs at outside backs. He's stuck to the sideline so often that he should be the touchie too.

Hayne does the hard work in attack. Gordon does it in defence.

But Hayne does work as hard, if not harder than Gordon.

Wesser dodges and weaves players and when it's down Gordons side of the field, Gordon trails him. Although he doesn't offload much. But he has gotten a few tries and gone close a few times from Wesser. Wesser doesn't have the best passing game though... that was evident in Origin 3. So i would say yes he trails Wesser when he has the chance to. Rooney would probably like to except he's not quiet as quick as Wesser... and would only see him for a second or 2.

A simple no would have sufficed.

Yes he does. You posted that stats.
91 runs.
934 metres.

934/91 = 10.26 metres per run.
91/13 linebreaks = 1 linebreak every 7 runs
91/9 tries = 1 try every 10.111 runs (and Hayne was 1 try every 10.333 runs)

I think he is a very efficient attacker when he has the ball.

No, he doesn't involve himself in every facet of attacking play. His 10 metre average is from strict old fashioned wing play. Hayne makes 10 metres per run and spends half that time banging it up into the forwards. That’s new fashioned wing play.

Uhhhh. The answer was yes though. He has a good try scoring rate for each run. A great linebreak rate and a good metres per run rate.

You missed this one;

"Does he hit the ball up to take pressure off the forwards?"

The answer is no to all three questions.

Panthers use their forwards for their attack. This is a well known fact. Our backs get involved when we're in the opponents territory. Wesser is the only back that ever sees any ball in our own half. This is not Gordons fault. He has no control over who Priddis, Gower and Campbell pass to. Sure he could leave his wing and run it up the middle. But he would just be a winger playing at fullback then.

You're just simply ignoring the evidence.

Most teams, if not all the other teams, have wingers who do hit ups. If Lang has told Gordon not to do that, then fine. But it’s no reason to denigrate Hayne.

Why? Wing defence is something we need to improve on immensely. Look at our friggen tries conceded down that wing. Campbell on the wing in defence is the worst move ever. When a kick goes to the wing, he gets outjumped with ease. When a big player runs at him, he gets by with ease.

You don’t have to worry next season. Of course, it does take a fair bit from your attack too.

Defence is one of the most important areas of the game.

That’s a bold statement.

There are two areas of the game in that context, defence and attack and yes, defence is one of the most important areas.

For any player. A winger *shouldnt* have to make so many tackles. But at the same time, if he is going to have a player run at him that many times, his first priority is to tackle him. In Round 9 he had to make 30 tackles and made 2 mistackles. That was against the Cowboys. Their wingers aren't players you want to mistackle either.

You were flogged in that game. And they spent the whole time attacking Gordon’s wing. If he made 30 tackles, John Lang made some serious errors in that game plan.

It’s only speculation anyway.

But Gordon doesn’t want the ball as much as Hayne. I can’t think of any reason why he wouldn’t do the work in attack that Hayne does apart from being told not to by his coach. As the kid obviously has talent, that would seem unlikely.

I'm well aware of that. He has a better try scoring rate for each run then both Hayne and Gordon. Not just by a bit, by a lot. He sees less ball, and gets more tries. Incredible. Although his defence is really weak.

Sometimes it’s just simply acceptable to keep an excellent attacking player in the side event though he has defensive deficiencies. There are plenty of current examples in the NRL and some of them have won a premiership.

To be honest, I’d have Merritt before Gordon any time, on current form.

This is getting kind've tiring. You seem to think that a winger is responsible for how often they touch the ball, when the halves and hooker determine who receives the ball more often then not. Ours pass to forwards. It's easy to say that Gordon could go looking for the ball more. But short of running onto it as though he is a forward... unless he gets the halves to specifically send it his way, it won't happen. Wesser sees a lot of ball as he runs up like the forwards do. That's the beauty of being a fullback. Look how much Hodges attack has increased when he didn't have to stick to his wing and could run up when he felt like it.... he gained 346 metres in one match. He was never near that while playing centre.

It was tired from the moment you only posted the stats that favoured Gordon, then you went into a mini-rant when it was suggested you paint the whole picture, not just the one you wanted everyone to see.

The rest has been you trying to convince me that black is white.

It isn’t.

 

[mxlegend99]

A line break is only more important than a hit up if the line break leads to a score. A line break is less important than a try.

:lol: Yeah ok. A linebreak is only more important then a hitup if it leads to a try. Who cares if you gain an extra 20m or more due to the linebreak.

edit - BTW, this line is a joke. Not meant to start an arguement.

A linebreak is an important stat as it usually goes hand in hand with either a huge amount of metres, or a try. Not neccesarily to the player that makes the break, but it's still a stat that has an effect on a teams attack. A try is the most important stat. As it's what games are won on.

But if a player gets say 5 tries and 15 linebreaks that result in another 5 tries. He is responsible for 10 tries sorta thing. Possibly more if the other 10 linebreaks result in 30+ metres gained then a try scored off a later play.

Tries are more important than all the other stats. If a bloke can score 30 tries a season (which is about Hayne's current strike rate) in the NRL, in defence he can sit near the goal posts having a smoke.

Too bad if he scores 30 but concedes 40. Not saying that Hayne has, but at the start of the season we had Hookey up that averaged a try or more per game, but for every try he scored, he probably conceded 2 ot 3 :lol:

So it is John Lang's fault....

John Lang is our coach, and our team plays the way he wants us too. He insists on defending Campbell on the wing regardless of how poor he defends their, and he insists on our forwards running the ball. Lang could coach the team to use their wingers and centres more. But Panthers have been based around having a big team that gets its metres through its forwards. That's something that i'm sure you know. And that most people bag on us for. As we're a boring team to watch. Aside from guys like Wesser, Campbell, Gordon and Aiton.

* Wingers in most teams do it. Grothe and Hayne do it every game. They go to dummy half on tackle one and/or two and and hit the ball up, mainly from kick returns. And if you notice the pack tiring, they'll do it later in the count and more often too. It's been a standard strategy for more teams than not.

Gordon rarely has a kick go to him. If it aint to Wesser, it's to Rooney. Most likely because it's a well known fact every 5 metres Rooney runs, 4 of them are sideways. He's not much of a liability to kick too as he is highly unlikely to get metres out of it. Gordon had a few good kick returns against the Warriors. One resulted in a linebreak and a try.

You were the one who posted only the defensive stats then I had to post the offensive stats because you claimed you couldn't find them.

So linebreaks are a defensive stat?

YGordon has more linebreaks because he only runs at outside backs. He's stuck to the sideline so often that he should be the touchie too.

He sticks to the wing because he is a winger. We don't need anyone running up the centre of the field, we have Wesser doing that. He is making linebreaks on the wing and getting us good field position while doing so. Wesser does that up the centre of the field. It's a pity the other side of the field only has Rooney.

Hayne does the hard work in attack. Gordon does it in defence.

Gordon has had a few games where he didn't get to do much work in attack. Although he has had a few games that involved a lot of attack and defence. 20+ tackles, 140+ metres, 2 linebreaks... a LOT of work. It's just a pity we don't get to see those more often. In that game (against Warriors), he got a lot of metres out of Dummy Half and by breaking tackles. He setup a try for Wesser, and saved a try or two. One of his better games no doubt. When the work is there he does it. Can't ask more then that from him.

But Hayne does work as hard, if not harder than Gordon.

Ofcourse he does. I wouldn't say harder though. He doesn't have to cover for an incompetent defender. And no, that's not Haynes fault. Covering 2 positions is not easy. Galea however managed to defend for 3 players at one point. (he is a great player, just not a centre)

Himself, Preston Campbell and Lee Hookey. So regarding the Tigers getting him, you're very lucky to have him. He's going to be playing as a forward for you guys, and will do an exceptional job with hit-ups and defending. He's not a playmaker or speed demon. But for a forward, he would be ahead of the average player in both areas. He just has less impact with his hit-ups. His defence is as good as you could want though.

"Does he hit the ball up to take pressure off the forwards?"



The answer is no to all three questions.

Our forwards don't need pressure taken off them, and the answer is not no to all 3 questions. :lol: He gains more then 10 metres on average with each run. You provided that stat yourself. I just added up all the runs, all the metres gained then divided the big number by the little one

Most teams, if not all the other teams, have wingers who do hit ups. If Lang has told Gordon not to do that, then fine. But it’s no reason to denigrate Hayne.

Most teams, if not all, have changed their attacking style since 2003 aswell. Panthers haven't. We return the ball with Wesser. Take a few tackles with our forwards. Then run wide on the 4th or 5th and generally get nowhere. That's not our players fault, it's the way our team was coached. Our wingers will return the occassional ball, or we might occassionally opt for going to Lewis/Hookey/Galea rather then a forward now and then... but we play a no risk game of footy. Simple forwards runs followed by a bit of back action toward the end.

It's the way the Panthers play. No, it's not very successful, but what can Gordon, Galea, Lewis or Rooney do about that? They can only work with the opportunities they have. These days, the backs do see a lot more ball and that's what hurts the Panthers. Ours don't. We're one of very few that can have games where every forward has clocked up 100+metres.

You don’t have to worry next season. Of course, it does take a fair bit from your attack too.

Most certainly does. Campbell is a great attacking player, one of the best. We won't be able to replace him.

You were flogged in that game. And they spent the whole time attacking Gordon’s wing. If he made 30 tackles, John Lang made some serious errors in that game plan.

No kidding we were flogged. But not because of Gordon or Galeas defence or attack.
Gordon - 30 tackles, 2 mistackles - 56 metres gained from 8 runs
Galea - 42 tackles, 3 mistackles - 17 metres gained from 3 runs (less ball to Galea means less ball to Gordon too)
Campbell - 4 tackles, 6 mistackles - 72 metres gained from 9 runs

Who do you think was the weakest link? Campbell. He only defends there because of Lang. Therefore Lang is responsible for the high defensive workrate of Gordon and Galea. He puts Campbell on the wing to keep him fresh for attack. Too bad that our centre and winger are being tired out from having to cover for a third player AND an increased workload due to that third player being the best player to target.

This is just an example of how Lang is responsible for what happens to our wingers. He makes them defend for another player, then he uses our forwards for attack. I don't agree with it. I think Campbell should defend up the middle, and i think we should spread the ball more and give Gordon and Galea more chances.

It’s only speculation anyway.

Correct. We have no way of knowing how each player would do in the others shoes. Anything short of Panthers signing Hayne and Eels signing Gordon would make it impossible to know.

But Gordon doesn’t want the ball as much as Hayne. I can’t think of any reason why he wouldn’t do the work in attack that Hayne does apart from being told not to by his coach. As the kid obviously has talent, that would seem unlikely.

He isn't told not too. It just isn't the way our team plays. Trust me, i'd love nothing more then to have our wingers and centres be more involved. Sadly, for the past 3 or 4 years, 90% of our attack has come from our forwards. I really hope Matt Elliot changes this, as next year we will have Gordon, Wesser, Gower, Aiton (a benchie but i hope he goes to 5/8) who are all very capable of being extremely solid attackers. Plus, we've lost a few forwards and our pack won't be as solid as it is next year. If we play the same brand of footy as we are now, with a weaker forward pack. We will get less metres, less tries, less linebreaks and less wins.

Sometimes it’s just simply acceptable to keep an excellent attacking player in the side event though he has defensive deficiencies. There are plenty of current examples in the NRL and some of them have won a premiership.

I know. Guys like Preston Campbell in the Panthers are a good example. Matt Bowen, Benji Marshall etc. I'm not saying that Hayne is that much of a liability in defence. But in a best of the best, if he were matched up against someone like Tate, Grothe, King etc. how would his defence be? His attack would probably be fine, although it wouldn't be easy to make linebreaks with those guys.

To be honest, I’d have Merritt before Gordon any time, on current form.

I don't doubt that you would. Although i'd love to see Merritt, Hookey and Campbell all defending on one side. As great as the attack would be (all 3 are exceptional attacking players, even Hookey is good at getting the metres)... all 3 are huge liabilities in defence. Galea could cover Merritt and Campbell pretty well. But it would still be a weakness in the side.

Hopefully this post is the end of arguing. Nothing here is meant to be aimed at anyone. Trying to avoid that as best i can. Although i did want to give some examples of how Lang is responsible for what Gordon is doing on the field.

Also, regarding Galea. His defence is obviously really solid for him to be making 42 tackles in a game. And don't take 17 metres gained as him not doing his job in running it. He only got the ball 3 times. Here are some other games where he had high workrates:

Round 2 - 7 runs / 41 metres / 28 tackles / 0 mistackles
Round 4 - 9 runs / 56 metres / 23 tackles / 4 mistackles (bear in mind that until Round 9 he had Campbell and Hookey defending with him - so he was almost covering 3 spots alone)
Round 9 - 3 runs / 17 metres / 42 tackles / 3 mistackles (Gordo's first game on the wing with him)
Round 12 - 8 runs / 66 metres / 29 tackles / 2 mistackles (obviously gets very little ball and that's part the reason why i said Gordon has fewer opportunities)
Round 18 - 8 runs / 83 metres / 28 tackles / 3 mistackles
Round 23 - 4 runs / 45 metres / 23 tackles / 4 mistackles

He is capable of making metres, and i think he could be great for the Tigers. He is a great defender at the very least, and usually his mistackles are due to having to cover 2 spots. I hope he has more luck with them then he has us.