Statistics can lie, we are told!
Looking at the Premiership table perhaps they tell a true story.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_u ... 776739.stm
We have the worst points score in the top 6. We have the worst defensive score in the top 7.
We have one bonus point whereas the top two have 3.
Its actually interesting that we are as high as we are.
The figures also suggest that both our great attack and impregnable defense have still not fired properly this season.
Perhaps we are worse than we think!
Statistics damned statistics!
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
-
EssexTiger
- Silver Member
- Posts: 662
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 8:57 am
- Location: Colchester, Essex
-
simon redshaw
- Super User
- Posts: 4454
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Tonbridge
The stats don't make pretty reading and at the moment we are poor compared to some in the Premiership. Pat Howard said himself we were poor yesterday. The trouble is we don't seem to be improving in the Prem despite the riches we are supposed to have.
We rely too much on Gibbo in the backs and we need more from them. We need the backs to come to life more and really take on more responsibility and we need better handling skills - although judging by the Premiership games I have seen recently that is not confined at all to us.
Above all, we need a backs coach and until we get one, we won't make the final leap in the league, IMO.
We rely too much on Gibbo in the backs and we need more from them. We need the backs to come to life more and really take on more responsibility and we need better handling skills - although judging by the Premiership games I have seen recently that is not confined at all to us.
Above all, we need a backs coach and until we get one, we won't make the final leap in the league, IMO.
-
simon redshaw
- Super User
- Posts: 4454
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Tonbridge
-
EssexTiger
- Silver Member
- Posts: 662
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 8:57 am
- Location: Colchester, Essex
My understanding was that PH was top man AND backs coash, whilst Cocker did the forwards and Backie the Defence. This has been added to by Graham Rowntree.
If we want, and I believe we NEED backs coaching why let Austin walk away, a true big picture guy!
PH is nowhere near being the finished article, he is learning as he go's as Tigers stutter and stop.
We need a PROFESSIONAL and soon! :?
If we want, and I believe we NEED backs coaching why let Austin walk away, a true big picture guy!
PH is nowhere near being the finished article, he is learning as he go's as Tigers stutter and stop.
We need a PROFESSIONAL and soon! :?
Seeing Bristols stats do you need a backs coach, they are top because of an impressive defensive record.
They are scoring tries, too. Lemi has 4, and Robinson and Perry both have 3. Our joint top try-scorer is Penalty Try with 2....
They have scored 18 GP tries to our 9. It's not just defence that's winning them games.
I would suggest that consistency of selection has been a massive help to them, though. Unless there are injuries, they field a consistent first team. This enables them to gel as a unit more easily. The exception was in the EDF when they dumped most of their first team and got handed a 60 point thrashing against Gloucester.
If we want to get a good run going and get a few good performances, it would help if we didn't change the starting line-up every time. We are yet to start the same XV in consecutive games - indeed, we are yet to start with the same XV twice this season!
On average we have made 5 personnel changes for each GP match. If you include positional changes, too, then we have made 7.5 changes for each GP match. This doesn't include the wholesale changes for the EDF matches.
Is it any surprise we are looking disjointed?
They are scoring tries, too. Lemi has 4, and Robinson and Perry both have 3. Our joint top try-scorer is Penalty Try with 2....
They have scored 18 GP tries to our 9. It's not just defence that's winning them games.
I would suggest that consistency of selection has been a massive help to them, though. Unless there are injuries, they field a consistent first team. This enables them to gel as a unit more easily. The exception was in the EDF when they dumped most of their first team and got handed a 60 point thrashing against Gloucester.
If we want to get a good run going and get a few good performances, it would help if we didn't change the starting line-up every time. We are yet to start the same XV in consecutive games - indeed, we are yet to start with the same XV twice this season!
On average we have made 5 personnel changes for each GP match. If you include positional changes, too, then we have made 7.5 changes for each GP match. This doesn't include the wholesale changes for the EDF matches.
Is it any surprise we are looking disjointed?
The stats don't lie, but they will be a slightly better reflection on things when everyone has played the same number of games home and away.
At the moment we've had 2 home and 3 away where as some of those that look to have a better record have had 3 home games.
At the moment we've had 2 home and 3 away where as some of those that look to have a better record have had 3 home games.
Kicks and scrums and ruck and roll.....Is all my brain and body need!
Further to my previous post about constant tinkering with the startign line-up, I've had a look at the other teams in the GP.
We are the worst offenders. By quite a distance.
Average number of personnel or positional changes from one GP game to the next -
1. Bristol (1.75)
2. Saints (3.0)
3. Saracens (3.0)
4. Gloucester (3.25)
5. Lon Irish (3.75)
6. Sale (4.0)
7. Worcester (4.5)
8. Harlequins (5.25)
9. Newcastle (5.5)
10. Wasps (5.5)
11. Bath (6.0)
12. Leicester (7.5)
Pat... stop ******* tinkering and pick a team!!!!
We are the worst offenders. By quite a distance.
Average number of personnel or positional changes from one GP game to the next -
1. Bristol (1.75)
2. Saints (3.0)
3. Saracens (3.0)
4. Gloucester (3.25)
5. Lon Irish (3.75)
6. Sale (4.0)
7. Worcester (4.5)
8. Harlequins (5.25)
9. Newcastle (5.5)
10. Wasps (5.5)
11. Bath (6.0)
12. Leicester (7.5)
Pat... stop ******* tinkering and pick a team!!!!
Well its still early days. Are Bristol going to stay top for instance? I doubt it. We've lost one and drawn one and won three. Thats a good return no matter how you look at it. The bonus points are exactly that.... a bonus. We took one against Sale and I don't think you can ever expect to take one away from home. only one we might have hoped for was Gloucester, which was a bit of a disappointment all round.
To 4071... lets see later in the season when our players are fresher than the rest. Plus you'll also note we have had a fair few injury issues above what most teams have experienced.
To conclude, it is FAR too early to be looking at the table in this much depth!
To 4071... lets see later in the season when our players are fresher than the rest. Plus you'll also note we have had a fair few injury issues above what most teams have experienced.
To conclude, it is FAR too early to be looking at the table in this much depth!
-
cynical Tiger
- New Member
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 9:48 pm
- Location: Leicester
75% of people are impressed with statistics. stats means nothing at this stage of the season, lets look again next March. if we are still in the top 4, then thats good enough for this Mickey Mouse play off. at the end of the day we are one game from second place.
Forget the Premiership, Europe is where it's at!!
I wouldn't read too much into the stats. However, Simon's right - we rely too heavily on Gibson, who is without question a great player. When he plays the backs are often very good. When he's out they look like schoolboys. I'm not sure whether it's a dedicated backs coach that is required or someone else to command the game as he does when Gibson isn't playing.