Stats, lies etc etc Wigan v Leeds

[cpwigan]

We often look at match stats but they can if anything present an even more confusing picture.

An example re how confusing / misleading / limited stats are. Zak Hardaker was heralded by the media for a fantastic game, outplaying Sam Tomkins.

The game was clearly a very mixed one for Sam with even his own fans critical in some quarters. Yet Sam made 3 times as many tackles as Zak (7 to 2), he only missed 2 compared to 3 for Zak. In attack Zak made 1 clean break, Sam made 2, Sam carried the ball twice as much (23 to 12) and offloaded once compared to 0 for Zak. Sam kicked the ball 6 times, made 38 passes compared to 0 kicks and 18 passes for Zak. So Sam was far harder working, more dangerous than Zak and better defensively. The one huge blot was the 3 errors by Sam compared to 0 for Sam. Perhaps the probability of Sam making errors was down to workrate. The stats on Zak give the impression of a turnstile in defence. Imagine Zak under the pressure Sam was under. Yet the media went hook line and sinker for the Zak was wonderful, Sam was shocking. Neither IMO was true.

Whatsmore if you take some other stats team wise;

Leeds missed 31 tackles whereas Wigan missed 22. So did Leeds really play a fantastic game of RL. Wigan missed less tackles despite having to do much more defending (337 tackles compared to 256). The % of tackles made by Wigan was 94% compared to 89% for Leeds.

To Be Continued

[Forever Warrior]

Fascinating comparison CP. I think we all see what we want to see in a game sometimes. Personal biascan often affect our views/opinions. The Gelling stats can provide a different perspective to the debate on his abilities and potential.

[jobo]

We often look at match stats but they can if anything present an even more confusing picture.

An example re how confusing / misleading / limited stats are. Zak Hardaker was heralded by the media for a fantastic game, outplaying Sam Tomkins.

The game was clearly a very mixed one for Sam with even his own fans critical in some quarters. Yet Sam made 3 times as many tackles as Zak (7 to 2), he only missed 2 compared to 3 for Zak. In attack Zak made 1 clean break, Sam made 2, Sam carried the ball twice as much (23 to 12) and offloaded once compared to 0 for Zak. Sam kicked the ball 6 times, made 38 passes compared to 0 kicks and 18 passes for Zak. So Sam was far harder working, more dangerous than Zak and better defensively. The one huge blot was the 3 errors by Sam compared to 0 for Sam. Perhaps the probability of Sam making errors was down to workrate. The stats on Zak give the impression of a turnstile in defence. Imagine Zak under the pressure Sam was under. Yet the media went hook line and sinker for the Zak was wonderful, Sam was shocking. Neither IMO was true.

Whatsmore if you take some other stats team wise;

Leeds missed 31 tackles whereas Wigan missed 22. So did Leeds really play a fantastic game of RL. Wigan missed less tackles despite having to do much more defending (337 tackles compared to 256). The % of tackles made by Wigan was 94% compared to 89% for Leeds.

To Be Continued

They did play a great game, particularly in the second half. They were virtually error free. I know this because at the moment I've a fair bit of time on my hands and I watched the entire second half noting any unforced errors. We did 24, they did 3. Finch featured a fair bit, uncharacteristically and there was no pressure put on Sinfield, who ran the show. It was a game though we could have easily won and I'd like to bet if we played them every week until the end of the season we'd beat them every time and by a fair margin.

[markill]

Stats like missed tackles don't tell you where on the field they were missed. If Leeds made only 80% of tackles in our half but 100% in their own 20 but we made 98% in their half but 90% in own half then it would put a different skew on things.

Interesting post, but stats can say what you want them to say. But i assume you know this anyway CP.

[cpwigan]

Somebody whose opinion I rerspect said to me almost immediately after the match we have been Madged. I agreed but did not pay it that much attention. The media were talking about the semi as if it was somehow some carnival of RL / a return to the traditions of British RL (traditions that IMO are largely mythological bullshit).

The stats indicate otherwise.

Leeds actually played a very conservative NRL brand of RL FAR REMOVED from what McDermott argue he is about. Leeds out Madged us with very low risk RL. Leeds achieved 87% set completion compared to our 69%. I think we all reodnised that Leeds terrirtory / possession was superior BUt what is as important or perhaps an explanation is that Leeds were incredibly conservative when in possession, moreso than Wigan. It was not dummy half running, Wigan and Leeds made the same number of dummy half runs each struggling to break double figures. It was not offloads, Wigan made 14 compared to Leeds 6. It was almost akin to the Melbourne philosophy of no offloading allowed that Madge endorsed. So Leeds were neither scooting nor offloading. Indeed Wigan achieved 20 quick POTBS compared to 11 by Leeds. We even made more clean breaks than Leeds, 9 to 7.

No Leeds simply confined the game to a narrow centre channel working over the same players repeatedly with hit ups where the ball is carried by the first receiver and not moved away from the ruck, either taken into contact or dropped off. Leeds made 37 hit ups in th first half, Wigan 24. In the second half Leeds made 48 hit ups compared to 30 by Wigan. So Wigan minus their best central defender Lockers and with several less than fully fit players such as Micky Mac, H, Lima were being targetted time and time again which explains IMO why Burrow started.

Yet the RL media think Leeds played a calvacade on RL when in fact they played it very safe and waited for Wigan to make mistakes. Perhaps this says much about the RL Media. Leeds never moved the ball unless they were close to our try line.

Discipline was similar. Few penalties conceded; 4 each although interestingly we were never offsie / interfering at the POTB whereas Leeds albeit only twice were and perhaps that says that Leeds wanted to get up quickly or that we were too much on the back fat / fatigued to do so.

The errors totalled by Wigan was double that of Leeds 14 to 7 but is that particularly high in a game, I doubt it is. Leeds total playing Melbourne/Madge ball was very impressive. Perhaps Wanes way is al a Wire awesome for 'taking teams to the cleaners' BUT less effective in finals football? Time will tell!

I personally think there can be a marriage of both styles. Wire may be more advanced at this stage in doing so. However, Leeds clearly out Madged Wigan!

I suspect the stats for many of our returning injured were not so impressive. Lee Mossop made only 8 carries for 44 metres. Micky Mac made 16 carries for 61 metres but was a pale shadow on the player he has been this season. Chris Tuson was dire with 4 carries for 13 metres. Liam Farrell was far more effective with 72 metres from 8 carries. He just needs to reduce his error rate. Jack hughes was equally effective too.

Unlike Waney, I think Leeds won the semi before the kick off with a clever but simple plan to work over less than fully fit players in the centre of Wigan's defence missing our best player (Lockers). Sometimes using your brain is far more important than merelt wanting it.

[cpwigan]

Stats like missed tackles don't tell you where on the field they were missed. If Leeds made only 80% of tackles in our half but 100% in their own 20 but we made 98% in their half but 90% in own half then it would put a different skew on things.

Interesting post, but stats can say what you want them to say. But i assume you know this anyway CP.

Hence the title Mark and you are right but it still stands Leeds played a conservative low risk game to see if Wigan would make errors which we did. The big question down the track is can you win big games playing total RL?

[shaunedwardsfanclub]

Stats like missed tackles don't tell you where on the field they were missed. If Leeds made only 80% of tackles in our half but 100% in their own 20 but we made 98% in their half but 90% in own half then it would put a different skew on things.

Interesting post, but stats can say what you want them to say. But i assume you know this anyway CP.

Hence the title Mark and you are right but it still stands Leeds played a conservative low risk game to see if Wigan would make errors which we did. The big question down the track is can you win big games playing total RL?

I think it would be difficult to win a big prize playing total RL. I am all for playing enterprising rugby, but in the right areas (opposition half). I am confident that if we adopt an NRL approach to our game then it will take a very good team, with more than their fair share of luck and playing at the top of their form to beat us.

The type of game we played on Saturday, given the number of players returning from injury, was crazy. We needed to dominate possession in order to conserve our energy - we handed the advantage to Leeds on a plate!

Possession and position are vital in modern day RL.

[cpwigan]

Can't argue with any of that although I think when it comes to Wane's style I think that mix between the two styles is exactly what Wane is going for. After all, Wigan don't play like Wire at all, we still don't offload the ball anywhere near as much and when playing at their best the players still play a very simple no nonsense style.

I would imagine that Wane's game plan was to dominate in the forwards first before getting the ball out wide but as soon as the errors came the players would obviously have found it hard to stick to that plan and would instead play panic rugby a little. Couple that with a few important forwards not fully fit or not match fit and that awful opening spell basically ruined everything.

Do you not think that there is more of a tendency to spread the ball wide, often 2nd pass or more even within our own half under Waney Cherry? In many respects when it works the RL under Waney is quality but can it work when it matters and regularly on those occasions?

My comparison with Wire is that they are more adventurous when in possession than Madge wanted.

Mac has been a positive this season and started to play around the POTB but v Leeds he was clearly not match fit and had his worst game of the season. Often the call is get it out wide to Sam, to Hocky even before going forward first. Moreover, as you say when you fall behind the tendency is to accentuate that desire BUT we actually tightened up in the second half and Leeds did too.

[Ron Doran]

While some of you favour statistics which positions on the field score most points, statistically?
I will let you guess at that one, but why does the ball not get to these positional players? Why five drives up the middle and then kick?
Lack of invention?
Over to you Barrington...

[Kittwazzer]

FFS its over. We lost. Move on!