There is one given in any sport like rugby - statistical data is not always conclusive about what actually occur during matches. Take fr instance the case of defence - a player can miss three tackles in a game - but none of the tackles actually have a major impact on the outcome of the game, whilst another player missing one tackle can in fact the detrmine the outcome.
The same can be said about virtually all aspects of the game. Saffex always talk about context - and it is very true - the context can prove to be a factor in given games. However, if there are certain factors where a player repeatedly does the same thing over 5 or 6 games - whether psotiveor negative - it gives an indication of the tendencies that player has developed in games he plays in and it can show what to expect from him in future games as well.
Some players show relatively strong performances in some aspects of the game and that can be evaluated as a negative in some cases. Say for instance a player scores tries regularly in games - but regularly give away penalties that really led to points being scored against his team - his tryscoring abilities are largely negatived by his penalty donations. Same can be said about defence. A player score tries , but his defence is poor - allowing the opposition to score even more points against his team - and the end result is in fact a negative.
There is always a tendency also to classify players acording to one incident in games - whether psotive or negative and then says that player is poor. Say for instance a player misses a tackle - butthe effect really has no impact on the outcome of the game - does not mean that player is a poor defender.
A number of contributors on this Board has some negative aspects to their evaluation of performances of players. I may mention specitically two members that normally -
* look at one instance or occurrence in a game and then build a players career reputation around that instance (Saffex and Mozart); and
* use stats as a means of player evaluation - but only insofar as those stats supports the arguments and aspects they want to emphasize - while ignoring the rest of the stats completely (Mozart)
Problem is that stats are ignored by Saffex not because of contaxt - but because the stats does not confirm their evalation of players. Where I agree with him is that stats of individual matches cannot be used as a norm - but where I disagree is that repetition of the same performance in a numbr of games shows a definite tendency.
There are ample cases that give pointers as to what players are likely to do in matches. Stats often enough contradicts the established "image" of a player as well. There as been arguments about various players that has created controversy on this Board and I want to quote a number of examples to illustrate my point:-
Francois Steyn
For some reason or another the image over the years has developed that Steyn is a very good attacking player playing a major role in that component of the game. The same applies to his defencive abilities.
However, if a person actually does a proper evaluation based on his career as a whole - those generl impressions are in fact statistically not supported at all. Francois Steyn started off his career very well and showed massive promise - but if you take his career info into account as to the following aspects - his latest statistical data are in fact disappointing. Take for instance the following:-
* Initially Steyn did kick a few important long distance penalties or drop goals - but recently it just does not happen anymore. His success rate in reality was always relatively low in the vicinity of 20% of the total endeavours - but his image on this issue is so establihed that statistical data is completely ignored.
* Over the past year in both tests and Super 15 games Steyn scored one charge-down try for the Springboks and none on Super 15 level. What makes it worse is that he nevr made a contribution to any try scoring by the teams he played for.
On the defence side Francois Steyn always had some question mark about his defencive abilities. He missed a crucial tackle in the 2007 WC that could have cost the Springboks th WC - Mozart constantly reminds us of that one. Howver, after his return from France last year there are indeed serious question marks about his defence as is evidenced by the following statistical data on Super 15 games played this year:-
* Tackles made = 35
* Tackles missed = 7
19 of the tackles made were in the first three games of Super 15 and in those 3 games he did not miss a single tackle. It must be noted that in the Kings game defence was a major issue and in that game Steyn only made 3 tackles. Since then his game has completely disintegrated and he missed 7 tackles as against 16 made. The missed tackles was a major contributior to the two game losses of the Sharks.
Juan de Jongh
Since 2010 when Juan de Jongh started playing Super 15 he scored 9 tries for the Stormers. In 2010 his intial impact was immense and he scored four tries in 2010 - establishing a very impressive image. Howver, in 2011 he scored no tries in Super 15 and in 2012 he scored 2 tries in the Rebels game. This year he bugged the drought in try scoring noticeable in 2011 and 2012 and scored 3 tries. That defnitely represents an improvement on 2011 and 2012 - but still is not really an indication of a real top class attacking player.
On the other hand De Jongh always was credirted with being a good defender and that was no doubt confirmed by his earlier exploits in Super 15. However, this year his defence has deteriorated alarmingly as is evidenced by the following stats:-
* Tackles made = 24
* Tackles missed = 8
In at least two games his defensive lapses had an impact on the outcome of the games.
SUMMARY
The above two examples specifically are given - because they are contradictory to what people generally believe about players - numerous others can be given to support this statement.
Is stats a reliable indication of individual performances in sigle games - the answer is no. Does it reflects the general tendencies of players over a series of games - the answer is yes it does show the tnednecies players display during a series and the latest tendencies players are likely to display in games.
