If the ABs kick percentage equalled the Lions

They would have won the first test by 22 points to 15 (they actually kicked better than the Lions) ... They would have tied the 14 man second test 21 all ... They would have won the third test by 20 points to 15. ... So as a matter of record Barrett's kicking actually cost a win in the series, even though his flyhalf play was the thing that kept NZ in the series. And the numbers are probably more pointed because the Lions went for the more difficult kicks. .. Finding a fullback or wing, hell even a scrummie that could take the kicking duties would release Barrett to play to his full potential.

 Mozart
One can only wonder about your knowledge of the game of rugby.   You go on about only two aspects of the game - namely defense and kicking - as if other components of the game is immaterial.
It still has not hit home that a comprehensive plan comprises the game of rugby    Even though kicking and defense are key components - other aspects relating to ball retention and recovery and a comprehensive attacking game are of even greater importance.
The idea that the latter aspects are of les importance went out of the window in 2007 with the new law changes and to keep on harping on the kicking and defense only is really questionable.   So try and get discussions on the whole game going- to write only about kicking is really a joke.     

Too stupid to comment on Tokkie....stick to reporting team selection.

 
Just another meaningless coulda, shoulda, woulda thread.

Completely pointless.

 

Why are you guys still surprised when Moffie posts this vapid drivel that would embarrass even a rugby noob? You've read all his other rubbish, why is this one particularly stupid?

"Finding a fullback or wing, hell even a scrummie that could take the kicking duties would release Barrett to play to his full potential."

Wehe! Spot the ignorance!

Moffie, who do you think kicks for the Hurricanes? Here's a clue, he has the same surname as Beauden. See if you can work it out, chump!

LMAO!

 Rooinek
Mozart's total contributions on this site relates to three issues, namely - 
*   kicking and defense iro games for which he used selected stats and if those do not meet his requirements he manufactured false game descriptions he conjure up;
*   the age of sportsmen - often enough in rugby  but covering all codes of sport;  and
*   demeaning a list of players he has develop a dislike for when they threaten selection of his favourite oldies in 2014 and 2015. The list has never changed since then and he is always using manufactured data to back up his statements.
The only things he come up with is totally repetitive and my effort above is an opening to get him to start thinking about rugby on a rational basis.  

Mozter, I hear where you are coming from, but if NZ had made their kicks, the whole nature of the game would most likely have changed, the butterfly effect and all. There is no way of knowing what would've happened. It is just conjecture.  

 
A thumbsuck.

So you have a contest which depends on several variables, you improve one variable, and the expected value of the dependent variable doesn't improve? Hahaha....education in South Africa must be even worse than I thought.

 Mozart
No logical an knowing person would make a deduction like you did.   The ideal is to improve all facets of performance - not selected components as you now imply.   

Actually no, in this case it's a calculation to see how much the AB kicking potentially cost them. The series it would appear. As for logic I have a PhD ....you have your thumb up your nose. Spot the difference

Like I said . . . a rugby noob!

You have a PhD in rugby - cannot be  since you no nothing about the game.  

You have a PhD in rugby - cannot be  since you no nothing about the game.  

Hey, Mr Well Educated, if you can't see that a change in score may result in an entirely different tactic being employed by one or both sides, then you my friend, need to review the quality of your education. The very fact that you use the word variable is exactly my point. If one variable changes, positively or negatively, it will have an effect on the dependent variables that follow. 

I wonder how many times this dull-witted bore has told us about his alleged PhD?

I reckon it must be triple figures by now.

Judging by the stupidity and lack of intellect Moffie demonstrates on here every day, I'm guessing he got the PhD out of a lucky packet.

Well Bloo if you want to isolate the effects of one variable, you have to hold all the other variables constant. It's an often used technique in economics called...Ceteris Paribus.....look it up. Nobody is assuming the game would have played out exactly the same way. But there is no reason to believe that strengthening the AB kicking would have weakened any other aspect of their game. ... It's so typical ......raise a point to clarify what happened and the new thought has to be destroyed. That's how an ignorant society works.

No one more ignorant on rugby issues than our very own Mozart.

The logic used of apples = apples could have been stated in the initial analysis. This would have countered or prequalified the butterfly effect argument .  

 
A PhD?

Really??

One would usually associate that with innovative intelligence ... not with "counter ruck egg laying 101" lectures that back fire and embarrass the lecturer.

This thread doesn't lead one to marvel at the intellect of the author ... but rather leaves one wondering whether the author even has a single digit IQ to boast about, let alone one befitting a doctorate. 

I would suggest in future that if you're determined to post something stupid, not to throw the "I have a PhD" into the mix at any time.



 

'whether the author has a single digit IQ at all'.......hahaha.....what are the alternatives?

 I often was on merit-rating panels of staff and came across a member of staff with a asters degree in Public  Administration.    The man was a Senior Administration Clerk = one step up from a starting level staff member.    He was not found promotable in previous years because of his lack of ability to translate his academic knowledge to administrative purposes and there was no evidence the panel could change that,  but the leader of the panel said that could not be in view of his academic qualifications.
He was as a result promoted and was promoted  to Administrative Officer and was a complete failure and his services had to be terminated as  result.
Mozart bragging about his academic qualifications reminds me of that individual and that is why  I have my doubts about his ability to deal with rugby issues on a level of competence .             

Ja well OOm, having you as a man rater is funny. Remind me again how did you do rating men in Make Believe Rugby......LMAOFY!

Just rating you is really funny -
*   rugby intelligence = 2 out of 10*   HR                       = 1 out of 10
A to tal flop on this site. 

 
Mozart ... I'm curious.

Over the years you've made it very clear to us all that you are a superior being to any of us. 

That everything you touched turned to a success story.

We've heard of you chairing top 500 company board meetings ... of your estates across the globe ... cellars filled with expensive vintage wines and rare bottles of cognac ... of the expensive art decorating your walls ... of an assortment of expensive sports cars waiting for you at each estate ... of how you enjoy going to the Opera ... to the Theatre ... and your preference for classical music.

To add to your supriority ... you have a better education than any of us ... a doctorate ... probably in a pure gold frame hanging above your fire place in your study ... side by side several other degrees and qualifications.

What an amazing life you've had, Mozart.

With all of this ... why would you slum it by associating with us lowly commoners on this MB?

Why do you have this unquenchable desire to exhalt yourself above us all ... all the time? If I have a pot plant ... your pot plant is bigger ... and better than mine. 

Is it really that important to you to prove yourself as our betters?

I don't get it? Please give me an explanation.