New England starting 15?

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Can someone link me to the best premiership stats page? I've been trying to find it on espn scrum with no luck. Or I get some stats but ones I don't really care about such as heaviest player...I want turnovers! (I've found it before so no idea why I can't now)

 

[McTallshort]

Quick one for the fly halves.....Burns the up and coming 10 for gloucester and possibly England missed a 1 on 1 tackle on that fleet footed young buck Andy Goode. God knows what a good fly half would do to him.

 

[Gavin]

Hodgson 10, Farrell 12?

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Quick one for the fly halves.....Burns the up and coming 10 for gloucester and possibly England missed a 1 on 1 tackle on that fleet footed young buck Andy Goode. God knows what a good fly half would do to him.

See your point...Andy Goode is hardly amazing but he's not as bad as some people think. He's in danger of being made the scapegoat for Englands dark years.
Just gonna say, if Andy Goode wasn't fat, he'd be pretty good; he had a good rugby brain, good passing, good kicking, and looked to attack the line. shame the belly held him backk

 

[Teh Mite]

See your point...Andy Goode is hardly amazing but he's not as bad as some people think. He's in danger of being made the scapegoat for Englands dark years.
Just gonna say, if Andy Goode wasn't fat, he'd be pretty good; he had a good rugby brain, good passing, good kicking, and looked to attack the line. shame the belly held him backk

All those winners medals on his mantle must be of some comfort at least...

 

[Peat]

I really hope that Robshaw doesn't start at 7.

Wood, Seymour, Saull - anyone who is actually a fetcher please!

We've been over this so I shan't restart the argument, but Andy Saull misses so many tackles its not funny and does not deserve to be in the discussion in any shape, way or form until he stops doing so.

Although I shall idly point in passing, looking at turnover stats on the Telegraph site, that Quins make as many turnovers as most - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/fixtures/3538935/Rugby-Union-Statistics.html

Northampton are winning (must have been done without Wood for the most part too, very interesting to see), Wuss are doing very well... and Sarries are bottom of the pile. Them and LI by a distance. Slight black mark against Gibson.

Sarries defensive style is very interesting, very few turnovers and tons of missed tackles, yet very few points conceded... would love to know how it works, other than players hurling themselves at everything.

The head to head tool on this is awesome btw, you can see there's very little between Foden and Brown in a lot of ways, but Brown has definitley made more assists, offloads and clean breaks, even allowing for Foden playing less games.

If you go to the HC bit, Brown's scored more tries than anyone else, and Foden's made more metres than anyone else...

Interesting to note that Robshaw has stolen more line-out ball than Wood and same as Croft (but with more games). He's also got a metric shitload more tackles and carries, which seems odd. Unfortunately, you can't see how many turnovers each has made, which would be a golden stat to see.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I didn't specifically mean Saull, just an openside in general

You rarely see Robshaw making a turnover - he's always around but the 2nd row/Skinner (especially) get more than him (from what I've seen)

 

[j'nuh]

Quick one for the fly halves.....Burns the up and coming 10 for gloucester and possibly England missed a 1 on 1 tackle on that fleet footed young buck Andy Goode. God knows what a good fly half would do to him.

1. He's not normally a defensive liability. He was wrong-footed (presumably because he thought Goode was going to make the pass and moved on to mark the next guy) to make the tackle, and bounced off. It didn't have much to do with pace. If anything, bulkier players are more likely to profit from running the ball into a wrong-footed player.
2. If we dropped players for clangers, how many players would we have left to choose from? The best players can make them. James Hook had a pass intercepted for a try back in 2010 for example, but you'd hardly hold that against him.

Also, reading into the stats can be a little misleading at times. For example, you might read into the Saracens not making too many turnovers as a defensive frailty, but perhaps the reason is that they don't need to make turnovers because they choke their opponents of possession. Similarly, on player stats, a player like Brown might have made so many carries because he's the target man for the other Harlequins players to get the ball to, whereas Northampton allow any player to run the ball back. Either way, Foden-Brown is a no-brainer now. Brown is excellent back-up, but Foden is the first player down on the England teamsheet.

 

[gingergenius]

We've been over this so I shan't restart the argument, but Andy Saull misses so many tackles its not funny and does not deserve to be in the discussion in any shape, way or form until he stops doing so.

Although I shall idly point in passing, looking at turnover stats on the Telegraph site, that Quins make as many turnovers as most - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/fixtures/3538935/Rugby-Union-Statistics.html

Northampton are winning (must have been done without Wood for the most part too, very interesting to see), Wuss are doing very well... and Sarries are bottom of the pile. Them and LI by a distance. Slight black mark against Gibson.

Sarries defensive style is very interesting, very few turnovers and tons of missed tackles, yet very few points conceded... would love to know how it works, other than players hurling themselves at everything.

The head to head tool on this is awesome btw, you can see there's very little between Foden and Brown in a lot of ways, but Brown has definitley made more assists, offloads and clean breaks, even allowing for Foden playing less games.

If you go to the HC bit, Brown's scored more tries than anyone else, and Foden's made more metres than anyone else...

Interesting to note that Robshaw has stolen more line-out ball than Wood and same as Croft (but with more games). He's also got a metric shitload more tackles and carries, which seems odd. Unfortunately, you can't see how many turnovers each has made, which would be a golden stat to see.

This is one of the very many reasons why rugby, along with many other sports, has **** all to do with stats, and why they should not be used to gauge a team/ player's effectiveness in a certain area.

Player X could have made twice as many tackles as Player Y, but that may be because Y plays for a team that loves holding onto possession, or because he's lazier, or something else.

Stats will tell you that Harlequins and Northampton have a very similar points difference of roughly +100, and both have scored and conceded a similar amount of tries. Reality will show you that Saints are 11 points adrift.

Its the tomatoes being fruits but being crap in a fruit salad argument.

 

[Peat]

This is one of the very many reasons why rugby, along with many other sports, has **** all to do with stats, and why they should not be used to gauge a team/ player's effectiveness in a certain area.

Player X could have made twice as many tackles as Player Y, but that may be because Y plays for a team that loves holding onto possession, or because he's lazier, or something else.

Stats will tell you that Harlequins and Northampton have a very similar points difference of roughly +100, and both have scored and conceded a similar amount of tries. Reality will show you that Saints are 11 points adrift.

Its the tomatoes being fruits but being crap in a fruit salad argument.

And that suggests that Harlequins have squeezed out some tight games but very rarely stayed competitive when beaten, as the losing bonus point column indicates.

Lazy use of stats has little to do with it. Intelligent use of stats combined with the evidence of the eyes is an incredibly useful tool in sport as can be seen by their increasing uptake in use.

 

[j'nuh]

And that suggests that Harlequins have squeezed out some tight games but very rarely stayed competitive when beaten, as the losing bonus point column indicates.

Lazy use of stats has little to do with it. Intelligent use of stats combined with the evidence of the eyes is an incredibly useful tool in sport as can be seen by their increasing uptake in use.

Statistics are powerful, but can be very misleading. To show you what I mean, consider this:
Team A wins 3/4 (75%) of their scrums and 7/16 (44%) of their lineouts, totalling 10/20 of their set pieces.
Team B wins 11/16 (69%) of their scrums and 0/4 (0%) of their lineouts, totalling 11/20 of their set pieces.
Even though Team A wins a bigger percentage of their scrums and lineouts, they still do worse overall in the set piece.

A lazy use of statistics could have been to look at Team A winning a bigger percentage of their scrum and lineout and immediately say they did better in the set piece, even though that wasn't the case. Statistical inference is difficult, and reading off of a stats page can be misleading. Some stats may speak for themselves, but others have put Banahan as a top try scorer in the past.

 

[Peat]

I don't see how that conflicts with what I said.

 

[j'nuh]

Not at all, just adding my 2p. I guess I'm trying to say that the stats aren't always indicative of the better player, particularly in the Brown-Foden debate. Foden is probably the best fullback in Europe and I can't see Brown ahead of him now or anytime soon, although he's great back-up.

 

[Seaton]

"An unsophisticated forecaster uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp posts, for support rather than illumination."

-Some Wise Dude

 

[Peat]

Not at all, just adding my 2p. I guess I'm trying to say that the stats aren't always indicative of the better player, particularly in the Brown-Foden debate. Foden is probably the best fullback in Europe and I can't see Brown ahead of him now or anytime soon, although he's great back-up.

Oh I quite agree. I really rate Brown, in particular I love the way he comes surging into the line and even into breakdowns looking for the pick and go - there is a superb aggression and instinct for the opportunity at work there which I think explains why his stats look better, he gets himself more involved - and Foden could possibly learn from that. But there are things the stats don't show, such as Foden's upper body strength and edge in speed. He's in great form and has definitely been our best back since being picked, we'd be mad to drop him while this continues. Although Brown will be putting pressure on him every step of the way.

 

[B10]

Telegraph are saying Saints flanker Calum Clark will be in the squad. Don't know a lot about him. Is he a fetcher?

 

[Ozzay]

Foden? Best in Europe?

Halfpenny, Byrne, Kearney to name a few.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Foden? Best in Europe?

Halfpenny, Byrne, Kearney to name a few.

Yup, he's better than all three of them.

 

[HowieLO6]

Foden? Best in Europe?

Halfpenny, Byrne, Kearney to name a few.

Halfpenny I'll agree with (although prefer him on the wing), Byrne is way past his bet (although was THE 15 of choice a couple of years back) and Kearney is a bit off-form.

Clearly, England have yet to use him to maximum effect. About time that changed.

 

[Ozzay]

Maybe that's why then, I hear massive raves about him all the time, yet to see it though to be honest, but I can imagine that's the same if I mentioned a welshman, who everyone raves about.

who you tipping to start 10 then? England need to blood Owen Farrell sooner than later I think.