Garrick general news thread

[LeonardCohen]

Stats are facts feathered friend and the Fact is Garrick's Performance and centre is Premium up against Premiership Winning centre Crichton

The Undeniable Stat Fact is
Inferior players miss more tackles
Inferior players make less line breaks
Inferior players score less tries
If anyone Disagrees with this fact they Defy logic and live in Denial

Season 2024 Stats Facts
Tackle Efficiency Garrick 86.6 Crichton 82.4 %
Tries Garrick 7 Crichton 6
Try assists Garrick 2 Crichton 4
Line Breaks Garrick 10 Crichton 7
Running metres Garrick 1598 Crichton 1491

You should tell pretty much the entire RL community what you’ve stumbled upon. You’ve revolutionised the game and the way teams are going to be picked from here on in. Garrick will be the NSW centre for game II when you pass this inside knowledge onto the coach.

It also explains why a team that has a higher completion rate, possession, and field position always win the game…wait? They don’t. Oops. Something must be wrong with the stats?!

 

[BOZO]

I have watched ten games of Reuben playing worse in every facet of centre than Brad Parker ever has in his entire career.

Seeing this fraud play in Michael O'Connor's number makes me sick.

Perspective is a wonderful thing as we all see differently

But those that have eyes can see why the Pedestrian and one dimensional Brad Parker as lost his place at centre and lost his place in the top line up in the NRL and is now languishing at NSW cup
The fact is....
If Brad Parker was such a great centre he would not have been removed from his centre position to the NSW cup back row position

 

[BOZO]

You should tell pretty much the entire RL community what you’ve stumbled upon. You’ve revolutionised the game and the way teams are going to be picked from here on in. Garrick will be the NSW centre for game II when you pass this inside knowledge onto the coach.

It also explains why a team that has a higher completion rate, possession, and field position always win the game…wait? They don’t. Oops. Something must be wrong with the stats?!

Garricks Great stats Stand up More than your theory feathered friend
We will agree to disagree

 

[LeonardCohen]

Garricks Great stats Stand up More than your theory feathered friend

Not really, I don’t have a theory, you do 😂

 

[BOZO]

Not really, I don’t have a theory, you do 😂

I had stats facts
You had the theory feathered friend
Season 2024 Stats Facts
Tackle Efficiency Garrick 86.6 Crichton 82.4 %
Tries Garrick 7 Crichton 6
Try assists Garrick 2 Crichton 4
Line Breaks Garrick 10 Crichton 7
Running metres Garrick 1598 Crichton 1491

 

[lsz]

Absolutely , I dont actually think manly would be anywhere near the top on any of the 1% plays of which there are many. We are a heads up footy team that looks to enjoy breezy saturdays at the beach and long walks in the park with the kavoodles

I think Manly still works and trains hard , they just havnt grasped the NRL . The club is a fair way behind, despite some competitive results

They have been in most contests but still seem a long way off

I know little about the game but when I compare our forwards to others we seem to lack consistent punch and the ability to stop other teams from dominating when they get a roll on (I know that is common in the NRL but it feels like we can do it at times but with no consistency)

 

[jbb/james]

I think when we establish big leads we look like what you describe

Maybe paseka needs to be tried as a bench for impact

the forwards. It seems to me most forwards have played ok, but together they spend a lot of time scrambling.

 

[LeonardCohen]

I had stats facts
You had the theory feathered friend
Season 2024 Stats Facts
Tackle Efficiency Garrick 86.6 Crichton 82.4 %
Tries Garrick 7 Crichton 6
Try assists Garrick 2 Crichton 4
Line Breaks Garrick 10 Crichton 7
Running metres Garrick 1598 Crichton 1491

You're the one pedalling data, so I think you might have the theory? I'm just of the belief that Crichton is a better centre than Garrick. Turns out pretty much the entire rugby league community agree with me, except for you and your tackle efficiency stats; have fun with them

 

[LeonardCohen]

I know little about the game but when I compare our forwards to others we seem to lack consistent punch and the ability to stop other teams from dominating when they get a roll on (I know that is common in the NRL but it feels like we can do it at times but with no consistency)

I agree and I believe it comes down to the opposition. The games that we dominate and have punch through the middle seem to occur when we are desperate for a win and play a team that is 'off the boil'. Take the Melbourne game for example. We'd lost three in a row and were playing in front of our home fans. We were desperate and came out with real purpose and intent. Melbourne, much like last year, turned up, dropped balls and generally looked off the pace. They played their version of what we coughed up to the Raiders...all teams have these games, it's why the Tigers beat the Sharks earlier in the year.

You have a serious team when you can beat the opposition on occasions where they actually do turn up and play their best footy. Penrith have been doing it for 4 years now. Teams turn up with intent but the quality of Penrith's match play gets them over the line regardless. We are not at that point. We can turn up, give it our absolute best and go toe to toe with the opposition, but are not guaranteed to win. Our forward pack is simply not going to dominate an opposition pack that is equally as hungry. I would go as far as to call it one of the bottom four packs in the comp.

 

[Will on the hill]

You're the one pedalling data, so I think you might have the theory? I'm just of the belief that Crichton is a better centre than Garrick. Turns out pretty much the entire rugby league community agree with me, except for you and your tackle efficiency stats; have fun with them

Hypothesis is the word for an unproven idea. Theories are hypotheses that have been proven correct. Theories explain why things happen while laws explain how things happen, both are equally important.😖🙄🤓😜

 

[BOZO]

You're the one pedalling data, so I think you might have the theory? I'm just of the belief that Crichton is a better centre than Garrick. Turns out pretty much the entire rugby league community agree with me, except for you and your tackle efficiency stats; have fun with them

What you said in your previous post was that Garrick is a bad defender as he struggles so much in defense
My answer to you was that
If Garrick is as you say is struggling so much in defense why is his tackle efficiency stats higher than Crichtons so far this season ?
If Crichton is the Benchmark then Garrick based on stats on field performance is not far off the mark
I do have fun seeing you Giggle in your Posts like Gilligan 🙂

 

[BOZO]

Hypothesis is the word for an unproven idea. Theories are hypotheses that have been proven correct. Theories explain why things happen while laws explain how things happen, both are equally important.😖🙄🤓😜

What is important on the footy field that gets your tackle efficiency up is stopping your opponent with affective tackles
Theories do not increase your tackle efficiency but only effective tackles do

 

[LeonardCohen]

If Garrick is as you say is struggling so much in defense why is his tackle efficiency stats higher than Crichtons so far this season ?

Easy answer - tackle efficiency is a statistic based on (a) contact being made and (b) contact being effective. Thus, if Garrick makes a poor read (e.g. hits in on a lead runner and the ball goes out the back and the opposition score, or he is late to react and jam in on the sweeping fullback), he will not necessarily miss a tackle that will show up in your statistic, but he might be partly responsible for the opposition scoring points.

I am not commenting on his ability to physically tackle an opponent. He is very strong and capable, but having problems in defence is so much more than just making an effective tackle. It's making effective reads, and misreads in defence do not show up in your statistic. He might even make an effective tackle, just on the wrong player as he rushes in and watches the ball go past him to the winger that scores in the corner. I imagine you'll just plead ignorance to what I am saying but its actually quite simple:
Tackle efficiency = making an effective physical tackle.
Defensive read = choosing the right person to tackle at the right moment (does not show up in tackle efficiency statistics).

 

[BOZO]

Easy answer - tackle efficiency is a statistic based on (a) contact being made and (b) contact being effective. Thus, if Garrick makes a poor read (e.g. hits in on a lead runner and the ball goes out the back and the opposition score, or he is late to react and jam in on the sweeping fullback), he will not necessarily miss a tackle that will show up in your statistic, but he is responsible for the opposition scoring points.

I am not commenting on his ability to physically tackle an opponent. He is very strong and capable, but having problems in defence is so much more than just making an effective tackle. It's making effective reads, and misreads in defence do not show up in your statistic.

I understand with what you are saying but Bad reads can also affect a players tackle efficiency as bad reads lead to missed tackles as well. Bad reads lead to the defender going in too early or too late and this effects the defenders timing and the efficiency of the tackle being made

 

[lsz]

I agree and I believe it comes down to the opposition. The games that we dominate and have punch through the middle seem to occur when we are desperate for a win and play a team that is 'off the boil'. Take the Melbourne game for example. We'd lost three in a row and were playing in front of our home fans. We were desperate and came out with real purpose and intent. Melbourne, much like last year, turned up, dropped balls and generally looked off the pace. They played their version of what we coughed up to the Raiders...all teams have these games, it's why the Tigers beat the Sharks earlier in the year.

You have a serious team when you can beat the opposition on occasions where they actually do turn up and play their best footy. Penrith have been doing it for 4 years now. Teams turn up with intent but the quality of Penrith's match play gets them over the line regardless. We are not at that point. We can turn up, give it our absolute best and go toe to toe with the opposition, but are not guaranteed to win. Our forward pack is simply not going to dominate an opposition pack that is equally as hungry. I would go as far as to call it one of the bottom four packs in the comp.

How enjoyable is footy talk?

 

[LeonardCohen]

How enjoyable is footy talk?

Can you tell I live for it? 😂

 

[BOZO]

Can you tell I live for it? 😂

We all breath and live for this feathered friend

 

[WiseyEagle]

How many sons does Matthew Ridge have and do any of them play rugby league?

 

[The '47ers]

How many sons does Matthew Ridge have and do any of them play rugby league?

Two sons, 13 and 6. And I don't know.

 

[lsz]

Can you tell I live for it? 😂

I love it while acknowledging I have no real idea about it at all (the round ball is my game)