Stats.

User avatar
TIGER
Member
Member
Posts: 3018
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 10:40 am

Stats.

Post by TIGER » Sun 26 Mar, 2017 10:24 pm

_20170326_211829.JPG
_20170326_211829.JPG (69.15 KiB) Viewed 696 times


Eddie
Member
Member
Posts: 3375
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 3:05 pm

Post by Eddie » Sun 26 Mar, 2017 10:55 pm

Thats embarrassing really.

Melbourne played as badly as they could have.

Anyone encouraged by that display today I think will be in for a rude shock next round.

tiga4eva
Member
Member
Posts: 2044
Joined: Sun 27 Sep, 2009 8:09 pm

Post by tiga4eva » Sun 26 Mar, 2017 10:58 pm

Our halves didn't capitalize on our field position. The bomb that nobody ever contests is a real weapon

tig_prmz
Member
Member
Posts: 7945
Joined: Sat 03 Oct, 2009 10:32 pm

Post by tig_prmz » Sun 26 Mar, 2017 10:58 pm

5-1?

i missed the second half completely but we got 5 penalties in the first 20 mins didnt we?
My Round 1 Team 2018

1. lolo 2. noffa 3. suli 4. milne 5. fonua
6. reynolds 7. brooks
8. packer 9. ET 10. Twal
11. McQuen 12. Lawrence 13. Eiso
14. Matulino 15. McIllwrick 16. Sue 17. Aloiai
18. Marsters 19. Benji 20. Grant 21. K Naiqama
Next: Liddle, MCK, Felise, MWZ, Thompson, Rochow, Gamble

User avatar
dazza65
Member
Member
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon 28 Feb, 2011 12:45 pm
Location: Sydney

Post by dazza65 » Sun 26 Mar, 2017 11:00 pm

As mentioned in another thread - we absolutely should have won that game on those stats - as above, embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------
Tigers?!? - Driven mad since - 1969-201?


happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 38990
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Sun 26 Mar, 2017 11:02 pm

And we are still 34-1 ...........please

User avatar
TIGER
Member
Member
Posts: 3018
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 10:40 am

Post by TIGER » Sun 26 Mar, 2017 11:30 pm

Yeah you couldn't write me a ticket big enough to back us to win the comp.
Give me 1000/1 and I wouldn't even have a lazy $10 on us.

User avatar
jirskyr
Member
Member
Posts: 5475
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 12:00 pm

Post by jirskyr » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:14 am

Eddie wrote:
Sun 26 Mar, 2017 10:55 pm
Thats embarrassing really.

Melbourne played as badly as they could have.

Anyone encouraged by that display today I think will be in for a rude shock next round.
I think that's short-sighted Eddie. The Tigers got on top of the stats because of the way we played - many of the Melbourne errors were forced ones, not just dropsies. Tigers played themselves into the front, but overall lacked that execution.

It was a superior performance to Round 2 and 3, you cannot say it's not an improvement.

The primary issue yesterday was not being able to convert enough of those opportunities and then slackening off for short moments to let Melbourne back into the game. Apart from tearing the Rabbits up Round 1, we have struggled to structure our attack close to the opposition line, something I blame the halves for. Cameron Smith was able to turn the match with a 40/20 and a few astute kicks, but Brooks and Moses were afforded many more opportunities than this and really only executed 3 or 4 of them.

And there is still clearly the slackening off that occurs, the half-time one I don't count because that wasn't for lack of effort, they'd just snuffed out a set. But the two long-range tries are not to FG standard and you'll never win if you give those opportunities to the top sites. Melbourne are the exact opposite of us, they are in it for the full 80 and don't need multiple invitations to claw the match back.

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9376
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:16 am

Christ how do you lose a game with those numbers?

TCL
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 2033
Joined: Mon 29 Aug, 2016 8:52 am

Post by TCL » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:18 am

Yossarian wrote:
Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:16 am
Christ how do you lose a game with those numbers?
Only when you play the team that is arguably the bench mark in the NRL.

BTW, Happy Birthday

criwdfluffer
Member
Member
Posts: 504
Joined: Mon 15 Feb, 2016 9:34 am

Post by criwdfluffer » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:19 am

Spot on Jirksyr AFAIC.

Melbourne made errors cos of our line speed and we were bashing them. Give the boys some credit.

Def agree that our halves cost us that game....poor 5th tackle options with both kicks and passes killed us.......and we were an inch off being 20-0 at half time......quite cruel really.

If out halves can execute better and the forwards keep up the intensity i reckon we will win more games than we lose.

User avatar
old man tiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 1080
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 10:37 am

Post by old man tiger » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:20 am

jirskyr wrote:
Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:14 am
Eddie wrote:
Sun 26 Mar, 2017 10:55 pm
Thats embarrassing really.

Melbourne played as badly as they could have.

Anyone encouraged by that display today I think will be in for a rude shock next round.
I think that's short-sighted Eddie. The Tigers got on top of the stats because of the way we played - many of the Melbourne errors were forced ones, not just dropsies. Tigers played themselves into the front, but overall lacked that execution.

It was a superior performance to Round 2 and 3, you cannot say it's not an improvement.

The primary issue yesterday was not being able to convert enough of those opportunities and then slackening off for short moments to let Melbourne back into the game. Apart from tearing the Rabbits up Round 1, we have struggled to structure our attack close to the opposition line, something I blame the halves for. Cameron Smith was able to turn the match with a 40/20 and a few astute kicks, but Brooks and Moses were afforded many more opportunities than this and really only executed 3 or 4 of them.

And there is still clearly the slackening off that occurs, the half-time one I don't count because that wasn't for lack of effort, they'd just snuffed out a set. But the two long-range tries are not to FG standard and you'll never win if you give those opportunities to the top sites. Melbourne are the exact opposite of us, they are in it for the full 80 and don't need multiple invitations to claw the match back.
I have to disagree with the first paragraph. We had massive amounts of ball amongst the Panthers and raiders early. The fact that we didn't score in those games sealed our fate.

Yesterday we corrected that and at least got over the line, but we still don't have anything more that 35 minutes of footy in us, which is pathetic from the rest of your post I guess we agree on this)

User avatar
Tiger Watto
Member
Member
Posts: 10560
Joined: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 7:12 pm
Location: Maroochydore Qld

Post by Tiger Watto » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:21 am

The halftime stats for Melbourne were worse, but we simply are not up to playing at this level.

We have Structural and Stock problems, the same as the last 4 years.

Cleary will need to be given an open cheque book to turn us around!
"Did someone buy you the internet hero play book for Christmas and you've only just started reading it?" - Nelson 21/04/2017

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9376
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:32 am

Tiger Come Lately wrote:
Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:18 am
Yossarian wrote:
Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:16 am
Christ how do you lose a game with those numbers?
Only when you play the team that is arguably the bench mark in the NRL.

BTW, Happy Birthday
Thanks mate. Melbourne are the best or close to it right now but still - you shouldn't lose under normal circumstances with those numbers.

User avatar
jirskyr
Member
Member
Posts: 5475
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 12:00 pm

Post by jirskyr » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:46 am

old man tiger wrote:
Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:20 am
jirskyr wrote:
Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:14 am
Eddie wrote:
Sun 26 Mar, 2017 10:55 pm
Thats embarrassing really.

Melbourne played as badly as they could have.

Anyone encouraged by that display today I think will be in for a rude shock next round.
I think that's short-sighted Eddie. The Tigers got on top of the stats because of the way we played - many of the Melbourne errors were forced ones, not just dropsies. Tigers played themselves into the front, but overall lacked that execution.
I have to disagree with the first paragraph. We had massive amounts of ball amongst the Panthers and raiders early. The fact that we didn't score in those games sealed our fate.

Yesterday we corrected that and at least got over the line, but we still don't have anything more that 35 minutes of footy in us, which is pathetic from the rest of your post I guess we agree on this)
I don't think you are wrong but I wasn't talking about the Panthers or Raiders games. I believe yesterday the Tigers' energy in the first 20 got us on top, forced dropped balls, strong defence and good contact. I feel we got the better of the stats because we played fairly well for 39 minutes, which is a 10 minute improvement at least, and we scored points, which you are right we failed to do. It is all a small step in the right direction.

Second half fell away AGAIN and until that's fixed, we won't trouble many sides. But I think Melbourne played badly because we started well, we forced that bad play... Melbourne aren't a team to come out and drop ball without contact, throw forward passes, kick out on the full... they don't do that stuff, you have to take the game to them to force errors. And I think for about 40 mins total we did that, we really troubled them.

Eddie
Member
Member
Posts: 3375
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 3:05 pm

Post by Eddie » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 11:05 am

jirskyr wrote:
Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:14 am
Eddie wrote:
Sun 26 Mar, 2017 10:55 pm
Thats embarrassing really.

Melbourne played as badly as they could have.

Anyone encouraged by that display today I think will be in for a rude shock next round.
I think that's short-sighted Eddie. The Tigers got on top of the stats because of the way we played - many of the Melbourne errors were forced ones, not just dropsies. Tigers played themselves into the front, but overall lacked that execution.

It was a superior performance to Round 2 and 3, you cannot say it's not an improvement.

The primary issue yesterday was not being able to convert enough of those opportunities and then slackening off for short moments to let Melbourne back into the game. Apart from tearing the Rabbits up Round 1, we have struggled to structure our attack close to the opposition line, something I blame the halves for. Cameron Smith was able to turn the match with a 40/20 and a few astute kicks, but Brooks and Moses were afforded many more opportunities than this and really only executed 3 or 4 of them.

And there is still clearly the slackening off that occurs, the half-time one I don't count because that wasn't for lack of effort, they'd just snuffed out a set. But the two long-range tries are not to FG standard and you'll never win if you give those opportunities to the top sites. Melbourne are the exact opposite of us, they are in it for the full 80 and don't need multiple invitations to claw the match back.

I think your missing my point. No doubt we forced some errors and played with some grit for periods.

However I reckon 95% of teams win games with those stats.

We lost and lost fairly comfortably in the end.

Sure we did some good things. However its about winning and losing and if you can't win when you have all those things in your favour your in trouble as a team.

User avatar
jirskyr
Member
Member
Posts: 5475
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 12:00 pm

Post by jirskyr » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 11:10 am

Eddie wrote:
Mon 27 Mar, 2017 11:05 am
jirskyr wrote:
Mon 27 Mar, 2017 10:14 am
Eddie wrote:
Sun 26 Mar, 2017 10:55 pm
Thats embarrassing really.

Melbourne played as badly as they could have.

Anyone encouraged by that display today I think will be in for a rude shock next round.
I think that's short-sighted Eddie. The Tigers got on top of the stats because of the way we played - many of the Melbourne errors were forced ones, not just dropsies. Tigers played themselves into the front, but overall lacked that execution.

It was a superior performance to Round 2 and 3, you cannot say it's not an improvement.

The primary issue yesterday was not being able to convert enough of those opportunities and then slackening off for short moments to let Melbourne back into the game. Apart from tearing the Rabbits up Round 1, we have struggled to structure our attack close to the opposition line, something I blame the halves for. Cameron Smith was able to turn the match with a 40/20 and a few astute kicks, but Brooks and Moses were afforded many more opportunities than this and really only executed 3 or 4 of them.

And there is still clearly the slackening off that occurs, the half-time one I don't count because that wasn't for lack of effort, they'd just snuffed out a set. But the two long-range tries are not to FG standard and you'll never win if you give those opportunities to the top sites. Melbourne are the exact opposite of us, they are in it for the full 80 and don't need multiple invitations to claw the match back.

I think your missing my point. No doubt we forced some errors and played with some grit for periods.

However I reckon 95% of teams win games with those stats.

We lost and lost fairly comfortably in the end.

Sure we did some good things. However its about winning and losing and if you can't win when you have all those things in your favour your in trouble as a team.
Sorry if I missed your point, I agree with everything you said in your last post. You just said earlier that "Melbourne played as badly as they could have" and I didn't think that was a true assessment, I think Tigers got on top and forced errors, Melbourne didn't play so badly, we got on top. But then Melbourne hung in and in the end their top players stepped up, so overall not so bad from Melbourne.

User avatar
Tiger Watto
Member
Member
Posts: 10560
Joined: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 7:12 pm
Location: Maroochydore Qld

Post by Tiger Watto » Mon 27 Mar, 2017 11:20 am

13 missed tackles in the opening 10min
"Did someone buy you the internet hero play book for Christmas and you've only just started reading it?" - Nelson 21/04/2017

Post Reply