LeonardCohen
Bencher
Kinda like your bias towards the tackle efficiency statistic; you posted it so anything to contrary is conjecture, rather than a valid point. Garrick is one of my top 3 players at Manly and I think he is an excellent attacking centre but there's a reason so many people on the forum are up in arms about his defence, and that's because it was dreadful at times last year. On other occasions, he was very good. I think it might be worth persisting but to use a tackle efficiency statistic to suggest that it proves he is the best defensive centre at the club is rubbish, no matter which way you look at it. Why? Because there's so much more to defending at centre than simply making a tackle.I respect your perspective on this about Garrick, but it is perspective.
I've noticed this a lot over the years with how we all interpret information, that when a player is identified with a particular quality or lack of, it starts off as noted isolated incidents, anecdotal so to speak, and then others pay more attention to that player's actions. Get mud thrown at you and it sticks, even if unwarranted or not as significant as implied.
We are all biased in certain ways, usually without realising it. If we or others make an assumption about certain characteristics, our attention gravitates to that person's actions and our critical analysis is far more focused on that person's actions than on others. Others may have just as significant characteristics but if its not brought to our immediate attention, we will tend to overlook those same characteristics in others. We make judgement calls and once its made public it sticks.
The comment about reading the play is such a example. If we believe there's a problem we will confirm it in our mind by looking for it. Yet no one is saying Koula reads the play poorly, despite a statistically poorer defensive percentage. This doesn't mean there isn't an issue. There may very well be. However our natural biases will discriminate when we convince ourselves there is an issue in one player. This is why stats, though not telling the full story, do tell a more accurate story.
Your paradoxical take on logic, strikes again.