Toohey's News

HarVeeGee13 said:
More try assists absolutely does not mean “better half” though and it’s a pretty easy thing to explain.

Your job as a half isn’t to generate try assists for yourself, it’s to generate tries for the team.

Imagine the same two halves in 5 try scoring scenarios - quick play the ball, the defence has messed up their numbers. Halfback A converts those opportunities into 2 tries via direct try assists - short ball to a back rower, cut out pass over the top - and 3 blown chances - wrong option, kick when they should pass, pick your own outcome. Meanwhile Halfback B converts the same opportunities into 4 tries via drawing/holding up the next defender, and putting the ball through the hands, but doesn’t generate a “try assist” for himself on any because the last pass on each play was a fullback or a centre.

Is Halfback A better than Halfback B? It’s 2 try assists to nil, after all…
Click to expand...
This 100%.

I'm open to the arguments that we're better with Sandon at 6 and Sharpe in the centers (I don't agree), but you could make a reasonable case. Trying to say that it's a "statistical fact" is silly.

HVG's example is enough to explain why, but to make it even more explicit - you want your halves to create points, not generate try assists. How many tries Sharpe has scored at 6 vs Sandon? How many extra tries have we scored because of how much of a running/general try scoring threat he is at 6? Compare their try contribution stats (because even the stat-heads realise you can't just judge a half by whether or not he gave the last pass)? Why do we average more points with Sharpe at 6 than Sandon?

Long story short, I'm strongly in favor of Sharpe at 6, and argued so even before the season. I think you could make a reasonable argument against that view - but it certainly isn't "the try assist stats are conclusive, anyone that disagrees is a shill for the local juniors".
 
Old mate went so hard on the “Sharpe in the halves cannot possibly work and WILL be a disaster” during preseason and is now stuck trying to convince himself he was right instead of just moving on like everyone else had no problem doing. “These specific individual stats that I cherry-picked without any further context are undeniable proof and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot” is elite debating skills, though.
 
JOJO82 said:
What sporting organisation in the world changes rules and interpretations midway through the season....how stupid.
Click to expand...
Yes, it’s not normal. Were sort of used to it in the NRL, they’ve been having random crack-downs on rules since the early 00s at least. But there’s not many other sports that do things like that.
 
jamesgould said:
Yes, it’s not normal. Were sort of used to it in the NRL, they’ve been having random crack-downs on rules since the early 00s at least. But there’s not many other sports that do things like that.
Click to expand...
I haven't watched Union in decades and hope they have got their act together, but one reason I stopped watching it was because every ref seemed to have their own interpretation of the "rules". Commentators with decades of experience struggled to work out what a penalty was for in many games.
In short, every game had random calls and crack-downs, and no one even tried to explain why.
 
My thought on the Sharpe v Smith saga.
Generally when side is full strength Sharpe plays 6 and Smith bench but if injury occurs then for example Sharpe gets moved to 1 or 4 with Ponga and/or Best missing and Smith moved to 6 meaning he is playing in a side with missing stars, weaker side so comparisons of statistics is unfair.
Am not a Smith fan, prefer Sharpe at 6 for the long haul but Smith is very handy as a back up or injury cover from the bench
 
JOJO82 said:
What sporting organisation in the world changes rules and interpretations midway through the season....how stupid.
Click to expand...
'V'Landys Ball' reached its fever pitch at the exact moment that the TV rights deal entered final rounds of negotiation/bidding. And almost overnight, thereafter, officiating reverted to that of previous seasons.

Extra stoppages or something about the officiating purposefully created extra advertising revenue in turn improving the value of the product to broadcasters.

You know Gus Gould was in on the scam because we didn't hear a peep out of him about 'the fabric of the game' during the height of the absurdity. V'Landys Ball, while it lasted, had everything to do with boosting the dollar value of the game
 
Billy said:
I haven't watched Union in decades and hope they have got their act together, but one reason I stopped watching it was because every ref seemed to have their own interpretation of the "rules". Commentators with decades of experience struggled to work out what a penalty was for in many games.
In short, every game had random calls and crack-downs, and no one even tried to explain why.
Click to expand...
Union seems to have totally different interpretations based on what hemisphere the ref comes from, which is maybe even weirder!
 
Les Misérables said:
'V'Landys Ball' reached its fever pitch at the exact moment that the TV rights deal entered final rounds of negotiation/bidding. And almost overnight, thereafter, officiating reverted to that of previous seasons.

Extra stoppages or something about the officiating purposefully created extra advertising revenue in turn improving the value of the product to broadcasters.

You know Gus Gould was in on the scam because we didn't hear a peep out of him about 'the fabric of the game' during the height of the absurdity. V'Landys Ball, while it lasted, had everything to do with boosting the dollar value of the game
Click to expand...
As a close viewer of the game it is very hard to disagree with this.
 
I like the rules around the ruck how it is now. Yes it seems to have effected teams, like the Dogs and Storm suiting and going against us, maybe the Tigers. Anyway hopefully we have adjusted and can play to suit the rest of the year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top