sheepsteeth wrote:I will be happy to be corrected by stats but for me Dom Crosby offers nothing in terms of go forward, he never seems to make any metres after contact and regularly gets smashed.
Against Catalans - 114 metres from 14 carries - 8.1 metres per carry and our best metre maker among the 4 props
Against Castleford he was going at over 8 metres per carry before he went off injured.
Against London 159 metres from 21 carries - 7.6 metres per carry and the best metre maker by some way among the forwards.
He's got a lot to work on still but he's still young for a prop. It takes time for them to mature and to learn how best to approach the game but I'd say Crosby is doing well so far.
He also seems to be strong in defence which is always a big positive. Dudson and Taylor offer size and strength but their defence does let them down.
You have to be very careful relying on average statistics. They can mean nothing at the end of the day. For example, lets say Crosby makes one excellent run of 20 metres, you then combine that with say 6 runs of 5 metres which produces a far healthier metres per carry than his norm. Lockers for example does the dirty no gain hit ups that nobody else wants. His team mates know the value of those!
You rely too much on stats Cheery, remember stats, lies etc etc and anything based on averages is a poor statistic.
THE Rugby Football League has reiterated its determination to clamp down on any abuse of referees.
I hope this applies to JJB from his outbursts last night
That's a no brainer!! Of course it doesn't :sly:
Anyone can support a team when it is winning, that takes no courage.
But to stand behind a team, to defend a team when it is down and really needs you,
that takes a lot of courage. #18thMan
I wasn't really expecting that much from the game although when we led, I thought something might happen.
The worrying things were not Pat at full-back, where he was outstanding but that we are so short of backs that we had to put Jack Hughes nominally on the wing/centre. Personally I'd have kept Logan Tomkins on and put him at centre - thought he had a great match last night.
The other problem is that individually the forwards are fine (Flower especially) but they are pretty much all the same and it was noticeable how many easy yards Leeds made last night. We do need some powerful presences to go forward and dominate.
I think last night we proved that we can contest well in the league against the biggest of teams with a young side, I thought smith did superb in taking the kicking role from pat however what we did lack was a bit of pace going forward as when thornley got the ball in space on the wing he didn't look as though he had the ability to do anything, if putting pat at fullback would you not put Hughes and charnley on one wing and thornley and Goulding on the other( him being an ex winger) ?
sheepsteeth wrote:I will be happy to be corrected by stats but for me Dom Crosby offers nothing in terms of go forward, he never seems to make any metres after contact and regularly gets smashed.
Against Catalans - 114 metres from 14 carries - 8.1 metres per carry and our best metre maker among the 4 props
Against Castleford he was going at over 8 metres per carry before he went off injured.
Against London 159 metres from 21 carries - 7.6 metres per carry and the best metre maker by some way among the forwards.
He's got a lot to work on still but he's still young for a prop. It takes time for them to mature and to learn how best to approach the game but I'd say Crosby is doing well so far.
He also seems to be strong in defence which is always a big positive. Dudson and Taylor offer size and strength but their defence does let them down.
You have to be very careful relying on average statistics. They can mean nothing at the end of the day. For example, lets say Crosby makes one excellent run of 20 metres, you then combine that with say 6 runs of 5 metres which produces a far healthier metres per carry than his norm. Lockers for example does the dirty no gain hit ups that nobody else wants. His team mates know the value of those!
You rely too much on stats Cheery, remember stats, lies etc etc and anything based on averages is a poor statistic.
If the average stats are consistent over a number of games then of course they have value. Saying that they don't is wrong. Even if one exceptional run is made per game that 'inflates' the stats, that's still one exceptional run per game, which could in tight games be the difference between winning and losing - what if that pass had gone to Sinfield rather than behind him to be picked up by JJB against the movement of the defence and then he hadn't ran 15 yards to score? Wigan might not have lost, all because of one 'exceptional' run that will have inflated JJB's average, for example.
Just watched the game back, we looked better on tv than we actually were, and I owe an apology to silver spoon, thought he had a nightmare at the ground. I was wrong.
29wes28 wrote:Just watched the game back, we looked better on tv than we actually were, and I owe an apology to silver spoon, thought he had a nightmare at the ground. I was wrong.
Wes, that sounds a bit topsy turvy. Surely you gain a more balanced overall view of a game by watching it again on tv?
29wes28 wrote:Just watched the game back, we looked better on tv than we actually were, and I owe an apology to silver spoon, thought he had a nightmare at the ground. I was wrong.
