Waratahs 2014

[Biffo]

great stuff, Mate, great stuff. you have given me a vicarious rant.

i went to the third frog test and saw the Wallabies live and in person for the first time in a few years and formed views similar to yours.

in the matter of Simmons, i could see exactly why he has so many critics - there have been very few Wallaby locks who so distance themselves from play beyond the set piece. i watched him a lot to try to get the critics' point and found that it wasn't hard to see him - he was almost always the Wallaby forward furthest from the ball. when the ball carrier ran towards him and a ruck happened to form that was accessible, he found a bloke to lean on, presumably to recover from his tiredness after his long walk.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Biffo, before Pfitzy segways the NRL thread to a Simmons rant, have a read of this:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/wallabies-selections-locking-in-some-discipline/

That should give you a good indication of why he's picked.

Best line exponent in the country, 2nd highest for tackles made by locks halfway through the season, 4th highest for runs by locks, equal 4th for tackle busts and the best tackle completion percentage.

The guy isn't a gun in the loose. But he's a set piece dominant work horse.

 

[Braveheart81]

Biffo, before Pfitzy segways the NRL thread to a Simmons rant, have a read of this:
.

Pfity should be free to segway wherever he wants!

 

[Hawko]

Back to Dave Dennis.

That is comprehensively the most awesome team- inspiring thing I've heard about in a long time.

 

[Biffo]

Biffo, before Pfitzy segways the NRL thread to a Simmons rant, have a read of this:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/wallabies-selections-locking-in-some-discipline/

That should give you a good indication of why he's picked.

Best line exponent in the country, 2nd highest for tackles made by locks halfway through the season, 4th highest for runs by locks, equal 4th for tackle busts and the best tackle completion percentage.

The guy isn't a gun in the loose. But he's a set piece dominant work horse.

thanks for that. i appreciate the point which you make. the stats you post are impressive.

my point is not that Simmons is poor at the set piece - he is very good at that. my point is that, outside the set piece, he's close to a passenger. i have read much criticism of him for being a passenger and then, the first time i see him live, he hitches a ride.

getting back to the topic, the Tahs' adjustments to the loss of Dennis will be interesting. i have a very high opinion of Dennis as he is dominant work horse at the set piece and gets through a helluva lot of carries and tackles elsewhere. unless they find a way to compensate, the Tahs will miss him enormously.

 

[Biffo]

Back to Dave Dennis.

That is comprehensively the most awesome team- inspiring thing I've heard about in a long time.

yes, indeed. that attitude just may result in the Tahs finishing a rung or two higher on the ladder than they would without Dennis' contributions.

 

[Braveheart81]

Good to hear we're playing in this tournament.

The other teams in our pool that might not be obvious from the tweet are the Stormers (Western Province) and Vancouver.

The tournament is on the 16th and 17th of August at Twickenham.

 

[tranquility]

Yeah that Simmons bloke, what a hack!

 

[FilthRugby]

I reckon Dave Dennis was a bit of a scapegoat for some poor Wallaby performances. He certainly didn't deserve a lot of the stigma associated around his on field efforts. Once fully fit, it would be good to see him in Wallaby gold (again) eventually.

 

[qwerty51]

So what would the make-up of our 7s squad be? Damn Foley and Phipps would be crucial here. Wonder if players leaving will be available.

McKibbin, Lucas, Lance, Naiyaravoro, Horwitz, McCutcheon, Hoiles, Volavola, Horne?, Alofa?, Carraro?, Crawford? I'm guessing some invited players like Kellaway, John Grant, Dargaville, Harry Jones, Northam might go along too.

 

[JSRF10]

I assume that NRC coaches may stop some of their key players going. Could end up being just an academy selection

Sent from my GT-I9305T using Tapatalk

 

[Pete King]

Question; If you catch the ball shuffle your feet forward a little then zero in on the ground does this constitute a run via stats?? Also if an opposition player runs into you and two other forwards and is brought down way past the advantage line does this constitute a "tackle" according to stats?

 

[Pete King]

One of the reasons Dennis works as the Tahs captain

Quality stuff

 

[Pfitzy]

Pfitzy can even manage to stick the boot into Simmons whilst we're talking about the Waratahs! Outstanding!

Its a gift.

Question; If you catch the ball shuffle your feet forward a little then zero in on the ground does this constitute a run via stats?? Also if an opposition player runs into you and two other forwards and is brought down way past the advantage line does this constitute a "tackle" according to stats?

As the old saying goes: there are lies, there are damned lies, and then there is statistics!

Scott Allen was my favourite for hunting down a stat that would back up his argument almost exclusively. "And if you look at the 'Super Rugby passes made by anyone wearing a Reds jersey', you'll see the top 20 spots are covered by Queensland players - just like it was last season! The leading candidates for Wallabies selection are obvious as I've proven beyond all skerrick of a doubt."

Tackles is a stupid stat for the reasons you state, but tackles missed can also be very dodgy - how close does it have to be in order to be a miss? Hand contact? Shoulder contact? What if the player knocked the other guy over but didn't hold him to deck, and two other blokes arrived to turn over the ball?

Who gets the blame for a lineout steal? The hooker? The caller? What about the lifters?

Do I get the turnover when the opposition won't release? Or does it just go down as a penalty and I get nothing?

My eyes don't lie about the effectiveness of someone's play. You can talk all you like about stats, but very few of them actually matter.

 

[Athilnaur]

As the old saying goes: there are lies, there are damned lies, and then there is statistics.

My eyes don't lie about the effectiveness of someone's play. You can talk all you like about stats, but very few of them actually matter.

Believe it or not they do indeed lie, our brain is conditioned to fill in the blanks and it does it a lot, so we often miss things. But you probably wouldn't believe me, the research into our cognitive processes no doubt used statistics.

 

[Pete King]

Its a gift.





As the old saying goes: there are lies, there are damned lies, and then there is statistics!

Scott Allen was my favourite for hunting down a stat that would back up his argument almost exclusively. "And if you look at the 'Super Rugby passes made by anyone wearing a Reds jersey', you'll see the top 20 spots are covered by Queensland players - just like it was last season! The leading candidates for Wallabies selection are obvious as I've proven beyond all skerrick of a doubt."

Tackles is a stupid stat for the reasons you state, but tackles missed can also be very dodgy - how close does it have to be in order to be a miss? Hand contact? Shoulder contact? What if the player knocked the other guy over but didn't hold him to deck, and two other blokes arrived to turn over the ball?

Who gets the blame for a lineout steal? The hooker? The caller? What about the lifters?

Do I get the turnover when the opposition won't release? Or does it just go down as a penalty and I get nothing?

My eyes don't lie about the effectiveness of someone's play. You can talk all you like about stats, but very few of them actually matter.

spot on, fuck the stats off.

 

[Pfitzy]

Believe it or not they do indeed lie, our brain is conditioned to fill in the blanks based and it does it a lot, so we often miss things. But you probably wouldn't believe me, the research into our cognitive processes no doubt used statistics.

Good point!

To counter that, let me explain some simple facts: I was at the Third Test. I noticed not very much detail about the contact zone from my seat, except the few plays that occurred right in front of me, or were replayed on the big screen. I know that recall from such fleeting incidents is poor.

But I recorded the replay, and sat down and watched each half with the remote in hand, noting down key involvements at each point. I am also in possession of a working knowledge of the set piece, being an ex-front rower, and a good understanding of the physics and trickery involved at scrum time, as well as lineout strategy as far as being a lifter and thrower go.

Hence, I can tell you that Simmons seems to be good at shunting a scrum from tight head lock, and clearly gets a lot of lineout calls right on our throw. But having watched and re-watched every single contact point of that Third Test (which you'll see if you go look at the thread), I've determined that for a big lump his effectiveness when running the ball or clearing the ruck is extremely limited. And his tackling is about baseline in that pack - there are several better than him, but he's probably no worse than the least of them.

This isn't stats - this is me sitting down and objectively examining each incident, not just using my bias, or filling in blanks, as you claim.

If I had the time, I'd analyse every player on our team in this fashion, but that would require at least 10 viewings of the same game to see if my compilation of the "statistics" is equal to anyone else's. I can guarantee they're not 100% the same anywhere, because rugby stats are a slippery beast, and what is an effective tackle to me may be a missed tackle to you, just based on whether an ankle was released.

 

[Biffo]

"If I hadn't believed it, I would never have seen it". Marshall McLuhan.

i am with Pfitzy. i believe only after i have seen .... and even then i retain my doubts.

 

[Athilnaur]

Thanks for the constructive and detailed reply Pfitzy.

I agree completely. A comprehensive video analysis is better than generic stats any day ocf the week. I would never say otherwise but I will say in defense of Austin he does a lot of video analysis in preparing his material. Even so I often felt he was Reds biased on occasion, but then thats my point. We are all biased. The trick is in recognising our biases, not easy!

 

[It is what it is]

The leading teams in professional contact sports use a comprehensive mix of quantitative and qualitative stats.
The accuracy comes because they are captured from detailed video analysis.
Each of the sports tracks very specific actions related to that player's position and the team's performance.
The best of the best teams use this performance criteria and stats analysis in decision making for team selection, recruitment and retention.
The players know what's important, know they're going to be measured performing these actions, and accountability results.
Exceptionally good or poor examples are shared with individual players via edited video footage online so they can review them from wherever.
Accurate and relevant stats are invaluable.