Joined: Apr 08 2006 Posts: 7069 Location: Central Coast
Ivor C&G Scarf wrote:Yes.
the game stats are up on the leeds board. which makes for interesting reading. shows leeds meter gains were far bigger than hudds and you guys made a lot more tackles.
No surprise Leeds made more total metres given how much more ball they had. The metres per carry stats though show we made more yards per carry than Leeds.
Stats are easily twisted to try and make a point, aren't they.
If London is Athens, Yorkshire is Sparta, a tougher community and proud of it.
Joined: Apr 08 2006 Posts: 7069 Location: Central Coast
Danril wrote:No surprise Leeds made more total metres given how much more ball they had. The metres per carry stats though show we made more yards per carry than Leeds.
Stats are easily twisted to try and make a point, aren't they.
no not really. they are cold hard facts about what players do in a game.
But they do not tell the whole story, do they, which provides the opportunity for people to use them in a misleading fashion.
20 errors by us, where did those errors occur? What was the tackle number when the errors occured? Not all the information is there to provide a full insight into what the stats mean.
So in essence, you're wrong.
If London is Athens, Yorkshire is Sparta, a tougher community and proud of it.
Joined: Apr 08 2006 Posts: 7069 Location: Central Coast
Danril wrote:But they do not tell the whole story, do they, which provides the opportunity for people to use them in a misleading fashion.
20 errors by us, where did those errors occur? What was the tackle number when the errors occured? Not all the information is there to provide a full insight into what the stats mean.
So in essence, you're wrong.
no im not
i take your point to an extent but in regards to tackles made, yards made, number of carries it gives you a good idea of who's pulling their weight, who's not?
The post I made, and which you disagreed with, was that stats are easily twisted to try and make a point. This also holds true for things like tackles made, yards made etc because again you don't have all the salient information. Was a particular player only on the field for 60mins and another one on for 80mins, for example. That would clearly affect the stats, so unless you have all of the information the stats can be misleading.
Metres per carry is just as useful a statistical tool than total metres, if not more so, but you only chose to highlight one to make a particular point. Thus being misleading with your stats. EOS.
If London is Athens, Yorkshire is Sparta, a tougher community and proud of it.
Joined: Apr 08 2006 Posts: 7069 Location: Central Coast
Danril wrote:The post I made, and which you disagreed with, was that stats are easily twisted to try and make a point. This also holds true for things like tackles made, yards made etc because again you don't have all the salient information. Was a particular player only on the field for 60mins and another one on for 80mins, for example. That would clearly affect the stats, so unless you have all of the information the stats can be misleading.
Metres per carry is just as useful a statistical tool than total metres, if not more so, but you only chose to highlight one to make a particular point. Thus being misleading with your stats. EOS.
you would have to be thick not to take those things into account with the info you have. i did watch the game the stats are from.
i find the stats are a good indication of how a player is going. what i disagreed with was that i was using them in such a way as you suggested.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 30 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
