Wales vs Australia, 5 November 2016, (1:30am 6 November AEDT) @ Millenium Stadium

[Braveheart81]

Rob Simmons played 13 tests in the period (11 starting)

Scott Fardy played 14 tests (11 starting)

Tevita Kuridrani played 17 tests (11 starting)

 

[Train Without a Station]

I'd say starting 11 of 18 tests makes you an inconsistent starter across the period then........

 

[Scrubber2050]

Foley got plenty of votes from his Tahs team mates

Human nature dictates that.

When it comes to clearly the best players then probably no issue. But if a bit wishy washy then your tribalism appears and your State mate gets the vote. I understand it is anonymous so no-body knows who you voted for.

Might be a more honest system that players nominate their points on a white board in front of the whole team including coaches. That would surely put an end to any shenanigans that is currently allowed.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Nah Scrubber there's no conspiracy in it.

Just common sense says those that spend more time on the park have more chances to poll votes.

Plain and simple.

 

[Braveheart81]

I'd say starting 11 of 18 tests makes you an inconsistent starter across the period then....

The winner played 15 tests.

Looks like Kepu played 17 tests and Moore and Foley 16.

11 starting tests out of 18 would seem like a consistent starter to me because no one is playing every game.

Otherwise we're basically saying the team has about 6 or 7 consistent starters which doesn't make much sense because the team was far more settled than that.

 

[Viking]

=
Otherwise we're basically saying the team has about 6 or 7 consistent starters which doesn't make much sense because the team was far more settled than that.

Was it really settled?
So many changes this year. Lots of injuries, lots of debutantes, lots of experimentation.

 

[Braveheart81]

Was it really settled?
So many changes this year. Lots of injuries, lots of debutantes, lots of experimentation.

A lot of players started over half the games. The team was particularly stable through the 2015 games which was half of the total.

Are we really saying that players playing between 13 and 17 games with 11 of them starting aren't getting nearly enough game time to poll substantial votes?

There are several players in the top 10 of the 2016 JEM with significantly less game time than that.

 

[Viking]

A lot of players started over half the games. The team was particularly stable through the 2015 games which was half of the total.

Are we really saying that players playing between 13 and 17 games with 11 of them starting aren't getting nearly enough game time to poll substantial votes?

There are several players in the top 10 of the 2016 JEM with significantly less game time than that.

Nah I think TWAS was just saying his peers voted Beale and Pocock despite the votes on the board.

Foley at third isn't saying a lot, He's voted better by his peers then Moore, Kepu, Simmons, Fardy, Kuridrani.

Kind of puts Foley in the middle of the pack not at the top. Given our horrible year it's nothing to rave about - being in the middle of a bad bunch.

 

[KOB1987]

Whilst I agree that from a statistical perspective the more games one plays the more opportunity he has to poll votes, he still actually has to have been perceived to play well to get the votes. It wouldn't be hard to index the votes just by dividing the total by the number of games played, or even more accurately by the number of minutes played. That's if somebody could be fucked doing it, that somebody isn't me.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Nah Scrubber there's no conspiracy in it.

Just common sense says those that spend more time on the park have more chances to poll votes.

Plain and simple.

Train
There must be a conspiracy in there somewhere - I am bored !!!!!!!!

But in all seriousness there is nothing wrong with a transparent system unless the ARU or coaches don't want that.

PS I firmly believe Hooper deserved the gong this year - no question at all

 

[Kev]

The votes are from the period of the past 12 months, not just the games this year. So it's not surprising Foley rates well as he played quite well last year.

 

[The torpedo]

We deal with real time in a real world (although I have to confess I'f like daylight saving if it wouldn't fade the curtains blah blah).

Don't forget about the cows!!!!!

 

[Dalai Ninja]

Thanks Dalai Ninja,

The fact that Foley polled 3rd in a season where he played more games than anybody else is concrete proof that Foley is considered an excellent player by his peers.

179 votes on the back of being selected for every game except one of 18 is not that great really.

296 votes on the back of being selected for every game except 3 of 18 is probably an indication of being considered an excellent player by your peers. Likewise Pocock's polling of what looks like 189 but I can't read properly to be certain, from his 8 games. Beale's 103 votes despite starting only 1 game in the entire polling period is another indication.

Not very surprising that the players who started the most games generally amassed the most votes. Kepu and Moore are the only consistent starters that don't feature in the top 10.

My pleasure, Train Without a Station.

However, you can't simply attribute Foley's score to turning up. Starting a game scores no points in the Eales medal voting. Your fellow players have to vote for you. 179 points in 17 games is 10.5 points a game. That means that on average, between 3.5 and 10.5 of his peers put him in the top three each game. I don't know about you, but I'd be very happy with that.

Although I'd be a bit crook at the half bloke.

Players, what would they know?

 

[Dalai Ninja]

Foley got plenty of votes from his Tahs team mates.

paranoia par·a·noi·a (pār'ə-noi'ə) n. A psychotic disorder characterized by systematized delusions, especially of persecution or grandeur, in the absence of other personality disorders. Extreme, irrational distrust of others.

 

[Train Without a Station]

So he received (on average) 10.5 of 138 votes per game.

A little over 1/15th of the votes......

 

[The torpedo]

Just seen the team.

Wales will break the streak and win by 10.

 

[Dalai Ninja]

So he received (on average) 10.5 of 138 votes per game.

A little over 1/15th of the votes..

Indeed, but a "little over" is all it takes. You have to understand how normal distributions work. The average is 6. 10.5 is 1.75 x the average. On a normal distribution, that puts Foley in the top 10% of results each game.

I'm not saying that Foley is our best player. Far from it. But his peers consider him to be one of the best, as evidenced by the Eales medal voting. He certainly isn't considered by them to be one of our worst, as many on the Internet seem to think - and like to say.

Thus, his 'backers' include the players. No amount of grim prevaricating will change that. Anyone who doesn't think that Cooper and Foley are both among our best players has one eye sewn shut.

 

[Quick Hands]

What's happened to this thread???

 

[Scoey]

It's not just this one.

As you'd know, it normally gets a bit stupid here in the Super Rugby off season but with the RWC last year this is the first proper off season we've had for two years.
It's not great but it's the best reason I've got for the straight up pants on head crazy that is this place at the moment.

 

[Dctarget]

He certainly isn't considered by them to be one of our worst.

Can someone smarter and less lazy than me work out statistically who is thought of as the worst from the votes?
Would that even be possible, or would we have about 8 or so regular players tied for consistently standard and not getting any votes.