Wales' Six Nations statistics

First topic message reminder :

I'm not sure how accurate these stats are but they make interesting reading.

Wales' Six Nations statistics

I suppose 'lads' is the closest you can get.

It's just a common phrase, usually used to express exhasperation/ astonishment. Similar to 'oh my word', etc in English

Morgannwg wrote:ESPN stats have been known to be a bit suspect in the past so taffin may have a point. Just saying like.

That is precisely what I have been saying.Unless these figures are 100% accurate they are worthless.

Rory you must be on some other planet mate - us welsh criticise our players and coaches more than any other nation I know - You're having trouble with us winning, that's the real problem - Many non welsh criticise welsh players, if its constructive its fair game. Come up with some stats to show where we can't take criticism

Nice to see that flamboyant french side of yours on fire in Paris at the weekend as well

And even then don't tell you much.

For example, look at Geoff Parling's tackle count against Wales. He made lots. George North in the same game, made a lot less. Yet Parling was one of the poorer players on the pitch. The point? Not everything that makes a player good can be accounted for in stats.

Within categories the importance of the individual skill varies.

Consider:
1 Parling in close forward contact tackles a Welsh player when there are three others who could also have done so and before the Welsh player gets any head of steam (one of those interminable pointy pointy standy standy Phillips things that everybody is now copying) and is looking to go to ground anyway.
2 North puts in an impressive open field tackle on Farrell dealing with a very dangerous situation in defence for Wales.

Both count for one tackle. Yet, Parlings is not game changing in its impact whilst North's is.

Stats are only as good as the method of analysis. Simply counting tackles tells you precious little as there is no qualitative analysis.

Not from my experience on these forums. I even got a PM for my comments on Lydiate.

Also that is the usual argument when you criticise anything welsh.. "you're just tired of us winning!"

You criticised Lydiate!

That sounds like you have a problem with someone just disagreeing with you, it's allowed on here

It started when I said was he didn't deserve MOM in the game against Scotland. I thought Rennie, Denton and Gray all were better for Scotland, and Faletau did even more work than Lydiate for Wales. I do think Lydiate is overrated by the welsh, and that many 6s do what he does and more, and the excuse is that he does the unseen work. But that is just my opinion..

RubyGuby wrote:That sounds like you have a problem with someone just disagreeing with you, it's allowed on here

Om,my Lord!That will set the Oirish off!!

The important thing about stats is how you interpret them. You can't just look at statistics to formulate an opinion. You need to watch the player, the plays he makes, the tackles he makes and the offloads he makes can be game breaking, but the stats won't tell you that.

A guy could have run 100 meters in a match but it was from deep kicks that he ran back and 60 of those meters were before he encountered th first line of defence.

By the same token you may have a player that tackled is heart out all day long and made one run of 15 meters with the perfect offload for a match winning try.

It is all in the context. However even if the statistics aren't 100% correct ( it is human eyes that correlate and collect the data after all) it does give you an indication int the work rate of the player depending on the position he plays.

you can assess missed tackle percentages, how many penalties he has conceded, how many line outs he has taken or stolen. so some stats will provide an indication of activity and others concrete data on measurable activities.

RubyGuby wrote:That sounds like you have a problem with someone just disagreeing with you, it's allowed on here

Nope, I love a good debate actually. The problem is it quickly dissolves into personal abuse at times.

Taffineastbourne wrote:

Morgannwg wrote:ESPN stats have been known to be a bit suspect in the past so taffin may have a point. Just saying like.

That is precisely what I have been saying.Unless these figures are 100% accurate they are worthless.

Yes, they been inaccurate, in the past. They could be more reliable now though. They seem to be the number one reference when people gather stats.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Not from my experience on these forums. I even got a PM for my comments on Lydiate.

I assume the PM was from a moderator?

Nope, not from a moderator, I didn't say anything wrong like. From a welsh poster.

Oh, well I can't see why you were messaged for having a different view. It's fine to give a different opinion. However, I also believe you do not like people disagreeing with your opinion after you have disagreed with their's. Just a view.

I don't have a problem with anyone disagreeing though, it happens everyday on these forums

Rory_Gallagher wrote:I don't have a problem with anyone disagreeing though, it happens everyday on these forums

I agree with you Rory

























for once

A few people who irritate me now have Private messages from me - go look, please.

Morg has no new messages.

Morg shouldn't imagine then that he irritates Fly

Plus...Fly lied anyway. But he did get people to check! Now wouldn't I love to have had a program that could have isolated those guys

Rory_Gallagher wrote:It started when I said was he didn't deserve MOM in the game against Scotland. I thought Rennie, Denton and Gray all were better for Scotland, and Faletau did even more work than Lydiate for Wales. I do think Lydiate is overrated by the welsh, and that many 6s do what he does and more, and the excuse is that he does the unseen work. But that is just my opinion..

He's got a point. Halfpenny was clearly man of the match in that game.

biltongbek wrote:The important thing about stats is how you interpret them. You can't just look at statistics to formulate an opinion. You need to watch the player, the plays he makes, the tackles he makes and the offloads he makes can be game breaking, but the stats won't tell you that.

A guy could have run 100 meters in a match but it was from deep kicks that he ran back and 60 of those meters were before he encountered th first line of defence.

By the same token you may have a player that tackled is heart out all day long and made one run of 15 meters with the perfect offload for a match winning try.

It is all in the context. However even if the statistics aren't 100% correct ( it is human eyes that correlate and collect the data after all) it does give you an indication int the work rate of the player depending on the position he plays.

you can assess missed tackle percentages, how many penalties he has conceded, how many line outs he has taken or stolen. so some stats will provide an indication of activity and others concrete data on measurable activities.

Exactly.

If only everybody who blurts them out kept that in mind.

You know who I'm taking about.

Stat spreading the news

I can remember North making quite a few important tackles to be fair.

There are some really great companies with very advanced video processing software systems that produce stats and pay people to collect and verify accurate stats and sell them to the coaching staff of the international teams. This kind of thing is massively expensive. Massively, massively expensive to get right...

It's highly doubtful that freely available stats will be anything approaching accurate. It would take it with a grain of salt. I wouldn't suggest they are even indicative. I would treat it as a bit of fun. If it makes a few Welsh fans happy to see glorious stats, then there's no harm is there?

R Jones tackle count is also very impressive second to Toby, but Jones missed the least tackles and played second row against Scotland for 60 mins and only played 30mins against England. Ian Evans tackle count also very good playing two games, the second row work rate in all three games has been good, the days of donkeys in the second row is well and truely over.

Yes Glamor. The best ever, clearly. He has "Lion", "player of the year" and "world cup winner" written all over him.

miteyironpaw wrote:Yes Glamor. The best ever, clearly. He has "Lion", "player of the year" and "world cup winner" written all over him.

Morgannwg wrote:

miteyironpaw wrote:Yes Glamor. The best ever, clearly. He has "Lion", "player of the year" and "world cup winner" written all over him.

Pot. Kettle. Black. Calling.

Make a sentence Morgan.

OK 10 years for being a Tinkywinky.

How's that?

I like the way the Mods ask us all to be nice to each other, not to goad each other, not to be unpleasant to each other......................


....and yet they give us a bunch of these nice little symbols ; which are all fun when used innocently but quite goading when used creatively........ me sense they are bullfighters who protest against animal cruelty

now, now Fly

Glas a du wrote:

biltongbek wrote:The important thing about stats is how you interpret them. You can't just look at statistics to formulate an opinion. You need to watch the player, the plays he makes, the tackles he makes and the offloads he makes can be game breaking, but the stats won't tell you that.

A guy could have run 100 meters in a match but it was from deep kicks that he ran back and 60 of those meters were before he encountered th first line of defence.

By the same token you may have a player that tackled is heart out all day long and made one run of 15 meters with the perfect offload for a match winning try.

It is all in the context. However even if the statistics aren't 100% correct ( it is human eyes that correlate and collect the data after all) it does give you an indication int the work rate of the player depending on the position he plays.

you can assess missed tackle percentages, how many penalties he has conceded, how many line outs he has taken or stolen. so some stats will provide an indication of activity and others concrete data on measurable activities.

Exactly.

If only everybody who blurts them out kept that in mind.

You know who I'm taking about.

Surely not me?