josie andrews wrote:I have always thought Lockers is one of our best players, and always defended him from the Lockers Knockers, you'll not get even one of them to admit how much we do miss him and his defensive qualities and it has shown in the last three games he hasn't played. Hurry up Lockers and get fit again soon we need you desparately
If we are actually 30+ tackles a game down then whoever has taken his place isn't putting the effort in.
However if you think we have only been defensively bad since he has been injured you must have missed the rest of the season.
Look back how many games we have conceded over 20 points with him IN the side. I think its 9 games. We have conceded 30 or over in four games he played in and over 40 twice.
This suggests to me our recent results are following exactly the same pattern as they have done all season and we are no better or worse defensively in the last three matches than we have been all season.
So you could argue his absence has not been noticed
Dave
I haven't missed any of the season I haven't missed a bloody game or for the reserves or academy. And I am entitled to my opinion regarding O'Loughlin as are you but don't keep quoting bloody statistics they often don't mean anything and I can't be ar*d with this topic any more because everything you have to say about any topic is law.
If someone says "Oh look our defence has got worse since Lockers was injured" for that to be true we would have to be conceding more points than previously.
We aren't.
So it isn't true, is it?
We have conceded more points several games when he was in the team. You can look yourself how many we conceded more than 22 or 26 and we have conceded more than 45 twice.
The defence has been poor all season and the reason is despite Hansen and Lockers tackling themselves to a standstill the rest of the team are letting them down.
So when one of them is missing we don't see a great change because the holes that were there before are still there elsewhere in the side.
I don't have strong views on O'Loughlin one way or the other. I think we need a lot more creativity at LF in attack, but on the other hand, he works hard defensively.
BUT.. the stats quoted earlier show that he misses 9.7% of his tackles - which is very high compared to Hansen (3%). Quality of defensive work counts as much as quantity.
Stats don't tell the whole story but they do provide some objectivity - which is badly needed in the case of a player who splits opinion so sharply.
Dave
I'll make it simple for you
average points conceded with lockers in the team = 21.5
average points conceded without Lockers in the team = 30
Surely that means that our defence is worse without him?
I think what DaveO is saying is our defensive record is rubbish with Lockers in the side it's just even worse when he isn't.
The stats shown surely show you that Hansen is every bit as good a defensive player as Lockers?
They are both making about 30 tackles a game, while Locker misses 3 tackles a game compared to Hansens 1.
Yes we do miss Lockers' defense but we aren't that good when he is, do you think 21.5 points per game is a good record?
What bugs me with Lockers is he has the ability to be more creative but he just doesn't seem to use it. I often think he would be better played in the 2nd row. I do think we are a better side with him in it and miss some of his booming tackles.
Just goes to show what a mess we are in when we are desperate for Lockers to come back. OK i agree he is a decent defensive player but offers nothing in attack or as a skipper.
Another point to consider is whereabouts in the defensive line each player is occupying, if Iam not mistaken Lockers is generally in the thick of the action and Hansen is slightly farther out so lockers is hitting the big guys more frequently which may account for his missed tackles. That said I have been impressed with Hansen this season cause I didnt think he was going to be good enough last year. We need both players on the pitch and a few more to follow their example in defence.
Two things you can not compare amount of tackles ,
Lockers makes harder hits , this impact also leads to the higher miss% . Hansen does work hard but he does not impose himself. On attack I can not understand our lack of breaks we have the best passer of a ball in Barrett but fail to create any doubt in the defensive line . This must come down to the training ? Lockers looked more of an attacking player early and has changed into a defender?
Whether some people like it or not lockers is a player who has more of an influence on a game than is given credit for.His defensive work is sorely missed.I agree he is better at 2nd row (he does not create enough at 13 for me,but is that the way he is being told to play) and he would also not be my 1st choice as captain,but he is a better player than people seem to think IMO.
mario wrote:Dave
I'll make it simple for you
average points conceded with lockers in the team = 21.5
average points conceded without Lockers in the team = 30
Surely that means that our defence is worse without him?
And I'll make it simple for you. You would fail any stats exam of you posted this as an argument.
He has only missed four games whereas no doubt you have averaged all the other games (including the 74-4 and 106-8 victories where won only conceded 12 points in total against duff opposition?)
An average over four games compared to one over the rest is statistically meaningless.
However what you can do is look back over the results and see we have conceded over 45 twice and have often conceded in the high twenties.
Anyone saying the defence has got worse in the last four games is ignoring how rubbish its been all season just to make a point about Lockers IMO.
In fact you could argue Leeds and Cas were, compared to many other games "better" defensive performances with 22 and 26 points conceded as we conceded that many or more in five previous matches.
