Before Mozart gives us another write up on

 ...not so clever mike ..lets hear some more of your comments on the Mighty Chiefs...the last time you wrote it was of a decline and impending defeat... kinda of enjoy them proving you wrong all the time...can't figure out why you load yr fantasy team with the Chiefs all the time though ...I think you are secretly their biggest fan but are loath to admit it...

 Frans was frot.De Jongh stepped nicely a few times but after 20 minutes disappeared feeling his work was done.Groom was reasobable, Allende very good and taute is geting btetter and had agood game. Kolbe is a scrummie and will not cope at super 15 level on the wing. 
Grant and Kurt are not up to it.
To think we let Pollard go!! It says it all about WP management. Can Gert Small right the ship like Rassie did before walking out.

This abysmal performance of 10s & SA teams must all be a plot to get kiwis to relax & take the RC & the next RWC lightly . There is no way things can really be this bad? 

 Rubbish JW you are grasping at straws. We have L ambie, Goosen, Pollard and Potgeiter all international class. Pollard - still under 20 is really looking the deal - eat your heart out.

All "promising" but you know what they say about promises. Nah, better have a plan B...(become an AB supporter) even Boklogic was smart enough to go to NZ. Kiwis will understand won't they?

Dejong had a good game today, that try was great. Also his supporting running line to be the try assist passers was also good. I still think he should be playing on the wing with the bigger Delande at outside centre.
The only thing that is certain is that Alistair Coetzee knows nothing

 Alistair took off the physical Burger and brought on the physical Fourie late. The guy really has no clue. I thought the two young Stormers locks acquited themselves well. That new young hooker looked as if he might have some promise as well.

The only logical reason burger was taken off would be he is not yet ready to play 80 minutes . Surely everyone can see his positive impact on the team. 

How often are "stats" about clean breaks, metres ran, defenders beaten, etc thrown in  our faces? How oten are we told that those stats are what is needed to  win games and  how often do we have to hear that this, that and the other are useless because of the lack of defenders beaten, metres ran (metres per carry, or what ever we want to call that), etc. Is that the alpha and the omega? Maybe, maybe not. What has won the game for the Bulls?

Metres run: Bulls 151-242 Stormers. Obviously the more metres ran did not help the Stormers.
Carries: Bulls 54-41 Stormers. OK, apparently the Bulls only achieved 2.9m  per carry on average, compared to the Stormers' average of 6.15m per carry. Seems like that didn't help the Stormers either.
Defenders beaten: Bulls 3-8 Stormers. The Stormers have beaten the defenders more almost three more often than the Bulls, but that didn't help them much either.
Clean breaks: Bulls 0-1 Stormers. The Bulls did  not have a single  clean break but that didn't helpthe Stormers much either.
Tackles made: Bulls 40-49 Stormers. Seems like defence is important but the Stormers did better than the Bulls. Not that that helped them much either.
Missed tackles: Bulls 7-3 Stormers The Bulls missing more than twice the number of tackles did  not help the Stormers either.
Turnovers won: Bulls 4-5 Stormers. Not even winning more turnovers than the Bulls helped teh helpless Stormers.
Kicks in play: Bulls 12-12 Stormers. Seeing they were Even Stevens in this dept make a verdict impossible.
Rucks lost: Bulls 5-2 Stormers. The Stormers lost less rucks than the Bulls as well, but that didn't quite help them either.



"So just how the hell did the Bulls manage to beat the Stormers then", one  might ask. Maybe these stats were the reason:

Rucks won: Bulls 42-28 Stormers
Mauls won: Bulls 4-1 Stormers
Lineouts won: Bulls 8-4 Stormers
Lineouts lost: Bulls 0-0 Stormers
Scrums won: Bulls 5-2 Stormers
Scrums lost: Bulls 0-0 Stormers
Penalties conceded: Bulls 1-5 Stormers

 

 The Stormers killed themselves with handling errors and penalties. Sometimes teams win games, today the Stormers lost one.

 Of all the #10's mentioned here the only guy who is of international standard is Goosen.Unfortunately he is injury prone and has spent most of his game time in the wrong franchise.
Lambie is a has been and fortunately Pollard is starting to show a great deal of promise.
My money is on a Goosen/Pollard combination for the years ahead.

Dog Doos
As per normal you find some stats that just did not happen according to real performance.   The stats missed two line out throw ins by the Bulls - which the Stormers won.   Where did those two line out losses go to? 
Have you actually watched the game?    

 Based on super rugby performances, its going to be a win if Boks get within 10 of Nz. Steyn wasent that bad, he made some good breaks in the first half, but overall his game was very poor.

 
clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 10583 RE: Before Mozart gives us another write up on
May 11, 2014, 04:20:19 Dog Doos
As per normal you find some stats that just did not happen according to real performance.   The stats missed two line out throw ins by the Bulls - which the Stormers won.   Where did those two line out losses go to? 
Have you actually watched the game?   
This is where I got the data you stupid idiot. http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/Super15/LIVE-UPDATES-Bulls-v-Stormers-20140509

In stead of pissing about the one  "stat" that is debatable in the argument, why don't you argue the fucking point? Or did you, once again, not even get the point?

 Dof Doos
Here are the ESPN stats - which is clear on the issue of line outs:-
Matfield0/001/1/00000012/03/100/0

Hattingh0/001/2/92501019/00/110/0
I am highlighting the line out stats for you - anybody that saw the match will confirm that it actually was the case.
But then an idiot will always be and idiot and you will always be one - that is a fact. Now bugger off and leave discussions to grown-ups who have seen the game.      

 The line-outs have fuck all to do with my entire argument, you stupid fucking idiot. Read the post again and argue the point or STFU.

Why don't you reply to the argument that all the Stormers' clean breaks, defenders beaten, metres gained per carry, etc helped them fuck all. They lost out to the Bulls' rucks, mauls and discipline. It helped the Stormers nothing having all those clean breaks, carries, etc and beating the Bulls defenders only to fall apart in the rest and still lose the game. Even those two line-outs lost did not stop the Bulls from losing.

I can understand, though, that you would want to try and steer away from that little detail.

 Dof doos
From your own stats - foolish fuckin idiot:=
Lineouts lost: Bulls 0-0 Stormers

Can you read - doos?  

 You keep on hammering on the same nail you  fucking idiot. Let me remind you once again. The line-outs have nothing to do with the argument that I raised but you would not go anywhere near that because you are too stupid to see the wood from the trees, you clown .

Go back  to my argument about the line breaks etc that helped the Stormers fuck all on the day. That was my argument. The two line-outs that you keep pissing on about had zip to do with that. The point that you are avoiding like the plague is that despite all the line breaks, defenders beaten, metres gained per carry, etc the Stormers still lost. Oh and just to sooth your aching little heart about the two  fucking line-out steals...... they also lost despite the two line-out steals. Now fuck off and go to sleep you stupid old codger.

 Dof Doos
There was only one element about your quoted stats that was so obviously wrong - so what makes the rest absolutely right?
Anyway - you missed the point about stats altogether.   Stats of players do not have to do directly with performances in one game - but stats are useful indicators of tendencies displayed by them in a series of games.
Stats must be viewed in a broader context as well.   If players hand over possession to the opposition and give away penalties - especially if such losses are instrumental in giving points to the opposition through giving away penalties or even scoring of tries it will obviously gave an impact on the results of the game.  
So your statement is stupid and the question worse.         

 mike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 10595 RE: Before Mozart gives us another write up on
May 12, 2014, 02:21:25  Dof Doos
There was only one element about your quoted stats that was so obviously wrong - so what makes the rest absolutely right?
Anyway - you missed the point about stats altogether.   Stats of players do not have to do directly with performances in one game - but stats are useful indicators of tendencies displayed by them in a series of games.
Stats must be viewed in a broader context as well.   If players hand over possession to the opposition and give away penalties - especially if such losses are instrumental in giving points to the opposition through giving away penalties or even scoring of tries it will obviously gave an impact on the results of the game.  
So your statement is stupid and the question worse.         
Jirre, maar jy is so toe soos  'n klei os se gat. The normal MO for you. When it suits you, stats are the alpha and the omega. It is not my stats, jou fokken idioot. I quoted my source. Something you never does. Go look at the ESPN stats then if you like. Fact is that no matter what the 100% correct stats are, you will still find that the Stormers beat the Bulls in line-breaks, metres per carry, number of carries, defenders beaten - which are all the elements that you are forever raving and pissing about  - and they still played second fiddle to the Bulls. Giving away penalties through ill-discipline, comes down to pressure from the opposition in nine times  out of ten. The team that is normally on top of the game and not under pressure normally concede the fewest penalties. The team under pressure are the ones who normally take to ill-discipline.

As far as your remark of "Stats of players do not have to do directly with performances in one game" goes. How fucking stupid is that? You have just been harping on about two fucking line-outs and provided the "stats" to "prove" your point.

Fact is that those two line-outs had fuck all to do with the point that I was making. Why don't you check up on those stats as well and comment on the line-breaks, etc? Is it because you have flunked that one and you do not have any counter arguments, or don't you have the balls to admit it?

 To add a bit more to ou Maaikie's dilemma........ Victor Matfield's view of the game:

"We fought our way back in the first half when were behind by a lot, although we dominated the field position, there were one or two breakdowns they capitalised on," he said.

"It just boiled down to decision making on the field, leadership and it is a great feeling afterwards to have a good win.

"It was really a good win the way we planned it, attack, kicking game and defence, I thought the players were accurate although we fell behind but they kept their cool for an awesome second half."

Dof and Stink Doos.
You obviously have a problem - you use stats and then do not see whether they are in fact correct by cross checking them with other stats sources.  You also do not understand the way I use stats - I do not look at stats in isolation in one game and merely use them to determine player tendencies.  
If the Bulls did not beat the extremely weakened Stormers side it would have been a scandal - so to quote Matfield is really ridiculous.  Now go and wash up and clean your fithy and stupid mouth as well.    

 Ag fokof jou onnosel moer. Man up and address the issues that I have raised. The fact that all the clean breaks, ets helped the Stormers fuck all. That is the issue. These are the figures from your beloved ESPN (Numbers for the Bulls on the left hand side and for the Stormers on the right):

Kick/pass/run
29     Kicks from hand     20
103     Passes     151
92     Runs     111
328     Metres run with ball     511

(The Bulls kicked more but the Stormers did most of the passing and running, and they gained the most metres with ball in hand)


5     Clean breaks     9
11     Defenders beaten     15
7     Offloads     11
67 from 72 (93.1%)     Rucks won     68 from 73 (93.2%)
8 from 9 (88.9%)     Mauls won     1 from 1 (100.0%)
16     Turnovers conceded     22

(The Bulls won the mauls, were almost evens at the rucks but the Stormers had the upper hand with clean breaks, defenders beaten and offloads)

There you have it. The figures from ESPN is different from the Supersport figures but they tell the same tale and that corresponds exactly with the issue that I have raised. They, the Stormers, had the upper hand in all the facets of the game that you are normally harping on and yet they could  not beat the Bulls. Why was that?

Yep. His gone again. Just as was expected. Left the room.

 Good morning Mike.

 Good morning - Dof Doos - I will res pond if you write sense and not bull shit - or shall I say dog shit.

 What do you mean? I have gone as far as looking up and using "stats provided by your very own preferred stats provider" and  found that they reflect the exact same conclusion that the other lot reflected and still you think that it is bull/dog shit?

Nee man. Stop ducking and diving and tackle the issue.

 Bulls were more proficient end of, teams all the times dominate stats like possesion and terriotory, but alot of the time they lose as the other team may hv hd less possesion but did more with it, as did Bulls.

 
HenPecked ... the day we look toward Potgieter as a possible Bok 10 is the day we know without doubt that we are in the biggest of dwang.

He offers nothing of substance.





 

 
Brycy ... I have been trying my best to shut DumbMike up this last year so what's with all the encouragement I see you giving him??

Please ... cut it out!!

The less he says the better.