Statistical Highlights: Bulldogs, Round 21

[Holman Barnes #1 Fan]

As an attempt to dull the pain of that loss, I'd like to pay mention to a few players who played really well.

All stats via nrl.com

(13) **Ryan Matterson** - 76 minutes (had a 4 minute rest), 29 runs (274m ,100 post contact), 41 tackles (1 missed), 2 offloads, 2 tackle breaks, 1 line break, 1 forced drop out.
Had one of his best games ever in first grade. Was everywhere in both offence and defence. He was actively ball-playing in the final 15 minutes as an attempt to get something going. Did everything he could have to get a win.

(8) **Thomas Mikaele** - 46 minutes, 15 runs (162m, 64 post contact), 24 tackles (1 missed), 3 offloads, 5 tackle breaks.
Second start in NRL for the rookie. He's doing above and beyond what you'd expect a kid to be doing. Threw a few risky offloads, most notably the one which resulted in Robbie Farah's injury. Has mountains of potential.

(2) **Paul Momirovski** - 80 minutes, 19 runs (172m, 54 post contact, 34 kick return), 2 tries, 2 line breaks, 5 tackle breaks.
Sadly only kicked 2/5 goals. Hopefully his confidence isn't dented from the final conversion, as he had his best game to date for us. His two tries were special finishes. Considering his height of 191cm, wing could be his position.

(1) **Corey Thompson** - 80 minutes, 15 runs (184m, 47 post contact, 166 kick return), 6 tackle breaks.
His kick returns were really good against a Bulldogs side presenting a line as straight as an arrow. Something worrying is the fact 166/184 of his metres gained were from kick returns, meaning his involvement outside of them was almost non-existent. Another downer is the fact he fell off Josh Jackson after dropping Taumalolo last week.

11 players were recorded to have run 100m+ (Thompson, Momirovski, Marsters, Nofoaluma, Marshall, Brooks, Mikaele, Chee Kam, Matterson, Eisenhuth, Twal).

Now to the most frustrating part - the team stats. If you hid the scoreline and only looked at the stats, you'd have thought we won by 20.
- We completed 37/42 sets (88%) vs 27/33 (82%). That means we had 59% possession.
- 1,911m total run metres vs 1,371m
- 4 line breaks vs 2.
- 30 (13%) tackles missed vs 45 (14.3%).
- 5 forced drop outs vs 0.
- 8 errors vs 9, 6 penalties conceded vs 7.

Reading into the stats, you can come to the conclusion that we lacked creativity in attack.

 

[TIGER]

I can't believe how our most dangerous attacking player got no ball.

Somebody needed to get the ball in Thompson's hands more often, I see this as a coaching blunder too, surely at halftime he had to talk about them about running plays for Thompson.

It was so frustrating watching the ball never end up in his hands when we were in attacking position time after time.

Watch the fullbacks of the top sides and see how involved their fullbacks are in good ball and around the ruck, other players bring them into the game.

 

[boonboon]

To be fair stats also show we played well but loosing 2 key players after 10 mins cruels your chances of cohesion in attack to finish it off. Also reflects that generally we are a really solid team but what we lack is strike well strike abd goal kicking although ud assume Mbye would have kicked better then Momo

 

[jirskyr]

I can't believe how our most dangerous attacking player got no ball.

Somebody needed to get the ball in Thompson's hands more often, I see this as a coaching blunder too, surely at halftime he had to talk about them about running plays for Thompson.

It was so frustrating watching the ball never end up in his hands when we were in attacking position time after time.

Watch the fullbacks of the top sides and see how involved their fullbacks are in good ball and around the ruck, other players bring them into the game.

My opinion is that Thompson does not inject himself enough, rather than failing to be brought into the attack.

Plain and simple for me - Thommo is a good footballer, smart, good step, good dogged support play and typically good hands. However he is highly ineffective as a sweeping fullback and has literally no passing or kicking game. He is a support player and quick on his feet against a staggered or retreating line. He has limited tackle-busting ability and he does not put sliding defences in two minds.

I do watch the fullbacks of the top sides - they are the games' top fullbacks!!! Thompson is a good guy but not even half the footballer that Tedesco is.

 

[jirskyr]

To be fair stats also show we played well but loosing 2 key players after 10 mins cruels your chances of cohesion in attack to finish it off. Also reflects that generally we are a really solid team but what we lack is strike well strike abd goal kicking although ud assume Mbye would have kicked better then Momo

I tried not to say too much last night, to think about it rather than post on raw emotion.

I think you've nailed it with strike power as much as anything. Tigers completed well. Tigers dominated field position. Tigers had a tremendous platform. We comfortably handled Bulldogs limited attack for all but 11 minutes. 18 points is tough but we had more than enough football at their line to overcome that, with or without the top-choice goal kicker. Lewis kicked down our throats all night and we rarely struggle to make metres, nor did the Bulldogs assert any ruck control at any point during the match.

The Bulldogs just played 100% counter-attacking football, like an Italian soccer team. They defended their line very very well and just waited for opportunity to counter. They seemed happy to give up the metres, seemed unperturbed by their own mistakes and were, but for the last 10 minutes, fairly comfortable in containing all the Tigers except Momirovski. Mommers scored both those tries with A LOT of work to do; in fact I'd argue that he basically made it happen himself because the service to him was modest on both occasions.

Yes we fell out of the match for a period and yes it hurt. But fundamentally we lacked strike. You can't have all those sets on their line and come away with 1 legit try and 2 late-game gasps. We were clearly tired and there's no way around that.

But the number of non-strike efforts with the ball was so disappointing. We got plenty of repeat sets, the attacking kicking game was generally quite good - both in-goal and on-line punts fell where they were supposed to, but very little kick-chase or competition for bombs. Very little option for the halves. Bad service from a makeshift DH, bad pass selection often from the halves, but also no options out wide and no barn-stormers in the middle.

Garner ran a line all night that Cogger gobbled up and he basically never adjusted his running strategy. He scored late only when Dogs were down to 12. Lawrence dropped one and ran what Blocker kept calling "the suicide line". Mbye was missing and Thompson is average on the sweep. We lacked second-phase. Marsters was barely given any ball that I can recall.

So whilst Taylor didn't give good service and it did hurt our fluidity, nobody out wide was giving legitimate threatening options. Hardly any players in motion and generally the class of attacking footballer is lacking - nothing for Bulldogs to fear. The halves were guilty of throwing passes despite the poor options, often right at the teeth of the defence, but also Brooks clearly started to realise that he was better off running the footy such were the limited options outside him.

You bring a Tedesco or a Latrell into that backline, just one of them, and it's a totally different story. That forwards work becomes a legitimate attacking platform for threats out wide. But frankly Bulldogs contained us easily and didn't appear concerned to defend their line all night.

 

[happy_tiger]

Mikaele's tackle on Tolman late in the game will do wonders for his confidence

He seems to rely on using his weight to fall on players .....that tackle proved to him he can handle blokes 1 on 1

 

[happy_tiger]

I can't believe how our most dangerous attacking player got no ball.

Somebody needed to get the ball in Thompson's hands more often, I see this as a coaching blunder too, surely at halftime he had to talk about them about running plays for Thompson.

It was so frustrating watching the ball never end up in his hands when we were in attacking position time after time.

Watch the fullbacks of the top sides and see how involved their fullbacks are in good ball and around the ruck, other players bring them into the game.

I agree , but Thompson doesn't seem to realize where a chance is going to open up

He needs to be sitting in Mikaele's , Nofoaluma's , Matterson and Brooks back pocket waiting for 2nd phase

 

[TIGER]

I can't believe how our most dangerous attacking player got no ball.

Somebody needed to get the ball in Thompson's hands more often, I see this as a coaching blunder too, surely at halftime he had to talk about them about running plays for Thompson.

It was so frustrating watching the ball never end up in his hands when we were in attacking position time after time.

Watch the fullbacks of the top sides and see how involved their fullbacks are in good ball and around the ruck, other players bring them into the game.

My opinion is that Thompson does not inject himself enough, rather than failing to be brought into the attack.

Plain and simple for me - Thommo is a good footballer, smart, good step, good dogged support play and typically good hands. However he is highly ineffective as a sweeping fullback and has literally no passing or kicking game. He is a support player and quick on his feet against a staggered or retreating line. He has limited tackle-busting ability and he does not put sliding defences in two minds.

I do watch the fullbacks of the top sides - they are the games' top fullbacks!!! Thompson is a good guy but not even half the footballer that Tedesco is.

Watch the game again, he's there he's just not getting the ball.
The best fullbacks get the ball passed to them

 

[TIGER]

Mikaele's tackle on Tolman late in the game will do wonders for his confidence

He seems to rely on using his weight to fall on players .....that tackle proved to him he can handle blokes 1 on 1

Tolman is washed up, I could tackle him one on one

 

[happy_tiger]

Mikaele's tackle on Tolman late in the game will do wonders for his confidence

He seems to rely on using his weight to fall on players .....that tackle proved to him he can handle blokes 1 on 1

Tolman is washed up, I could tackle him one on one

Maybe ...but stopping him dead as he did will do wonders .....he will get a lot of confidence from it ..... he hasn't made many ( if any )1 on 1 tackles at this level

 

[jirskyr]

The best fullbacks get the ball passed to them

Right and unf he's not the best fullback. Good solid effort.

 

[Geo]

To be fair stats also show we played well but loosing 2 key players after 10 mins cruels your chances of cohesion in attack to finish it off. Also reflects that generally we are a really solid team but what we lack is strike well strike abd goal kicking although ud assume Mbye would have kicked better then Momo

I tried not to say too much last night, to think about it rather than post on raw emotion.

I think you've nailed it with strike power as much as anything. Tigers completed well. Tigers dominated field position. Tigers had a tremendous platform. We comfortably handled Bulldogs limited attack for all but 11 minutes. 18 points is tough but we had more than enough football at their line to overcome that, with or without the top-choice goal kicker. Lewis kicked down our throats all night and we rarely struggle to make metres, nor did the Bulldogs assert any ruck control at any point during the match.

The Bulldogs just played 100% counter-attacking football, like an Italian soccer team. They defended their line very very well and just waited for opportunity to counter. They seemed happy to give up the metres, seemed unperturbed by their own mistakes and were, but for the last 10 minutes, fairly comfortable in containing all the Tigers except Momirovski. Mommers scored both those tries with A LOT of work to do; in fact I'd argue that he basically made it happen himself because the service to him was modest on both occasions.

Yes we fell out of the match for a period and yes it hurt. But fundamentally we lacked strike. You can't have all those sets on their line and come away with 1 legit try and 2 late-game gasps. We were clearly tired and there's no way around that.

But the number of non-strike efforts with the ball was so disappointing. We got plenty of repeat sets, the attacking kicking game was generally quite good - both in-goal and on-line punts fell where they were supposed to, but very little kick-chase or competition for bombs. Very little option for the halves. Bad service from a makeshift DH, bad pass selection often from the halves, but also no options out wide and no barn-stormers in the middle.

Garner ran a line all night that Cogger gobbled up and he basically never adjusted his running strategy. He scored late only when Dogs were down to 12. Lawrence dropped one and ran what Blocker kept calling "the suicide line". Mbye was missing and Thompson is average on the sweep. We lacked second-phase. Marsters was barely given any ball that I can recall.

So whilst Taylor didn't give good service and it did hurt our fluidity, nobody out wide was giving legitimate threatening options. Hardly any players in motion and generally the class of attacking footballer is lacking - nothing for Bulldogs to fear. The halves were guilty of throwing passes despite the poor options, often right at the teeth of the defence, but also Brooks clearly started to realise that he was better off running the footy such were the limited options outside him.

You bring a Tedesco or a Latrell into that backline, just one of them, and it's a totally different story. That forwards work becomes a legitimate attacking platform for threats out wide. But frankly Bulldogs contained us easily and didn't appear concerned to defend their line all night.

I enjoy your posts often as it saves me a lot of typing..

It's often weird to look at stats as I know you like them ..I looked at all the halve's one's last night and removed the names...

A. 1 TA 1 LBA 11 Tackles 1 T Breaks 1 M Tackle 0 Offlads 2 Errors 118 Run M 155 KM 1 PC 0 RS
B. 0 TA 0 LBA 28 Tackles 0 T Breaks 2 M Tackles 0 Offloads 0 Errors 46 Run M 374 KM 0 PC 0 RS
C. 1 TA 1 LBA 15 Tackles 6 T Breaks 3 M Tackles 1 Offload 1 Error 159 Run M 305 KM 0 PC 2 RS
D. 1 TA 1 LBA 16 Tackles 0 T Breaks 3 M Tackles 1 Offload 0 Errors 65 Run M 249 KM 1 PC 0 RS..

 

[Viking Warrior]

I reckon Matterson is better then Arrow, what a player..

 

[happy_tiger]

To be fair stats also show we played well but loosing 2 key players after 10 mins cruels your chances of cohesion in attack to finish it off. Also reflects that generally we are a really solid team but what we lack is strike well strike abd goal kicking although ud assume Mbye would have kicked better then Momo

I tried not to say too much last night, to think about it rather than post on raw emotion.

I think you've nailed it with strike power as much as anything. Tigers completed well. Tigers dominated field position. Tigers had a tremendous platform. We comfortably handled Bulldogs limited attack for all but 11 minutes. 18 points is tough but we had more than enough football at their line to overcome that, with or without the top-choice goal kicker. Lewis kicked down our throats all night and we rarely struggle to make metres, nor did the Bulldogs assert any ruck control at any point during the match.

The Bulldogs just played 100% counter-attacking football, like an Italian soccer team. They defended their line very very well and just waited for opportunity to counter. They seemed happy to give up the metres, seemed unperturbed by their own mistakes and were, but for the last 10 minutes, fairly comfortable in containing all the Tigers except Momirovski. Mommers scored both those tries with A LOT of work to do; in fact I'd argue that he basically made it happen himself because the service to him was modest on both occasions.

Yes we fell out of the match for a period and yes it hurt. But fundamentally we lacked strike. You can't have all those sets on their line and come away with 1 legit try and 2 late-game gasps. We were clearly tired and there's no way around that.

But the number of non-strike efforts with the ball was so disappointing. We got plenty of repeat sets, the attacking kicking game was generally quite good - both in-goal and on-line punts fell where they were supposed to, but very little kick-chase or competition for bombs. Very little option for the halves. Bad service from a makeshift DH, bad pass selection often from the halves, but also no options out wide and no barn-stormers in the middle.

Garner ran a line all night that Cogger gobbled up and he basically never adjusted his running strategy. He scored late only when Dogs were down to 12. Lawrence dropped one and ran what Blocker kept calling "the suicide line". Mbye was missing and Thompson is average on the sweep. We lacked second-phase. Marsters was barely given any ball that I can recall.

So whilst Taylor didn't give good service and it did hurt our fluidity, nobody out wide was giving legitimate threatening options. Hardly any players in motion and generally the class of attacking footballer is lacking - nothing for Bulldogs to fear. The halves were guilty of throwing passes despite the poor options, often right at the teeth of the defence, but also Brooks clearly started to realise that he was better off running the footy such were the limited options outside him.

You bring a Tedesco or a Latrell into that backline, just one of them, and it's a totally different story. That forwards work becomes a legitimate attacking platform for threats out wide. But frankly Bulldogs contained us easily and didn't appear concerned to defend their line all night.

I enjoy your posts often as it saves me a lot of typing..

It's often weird to look at stats as I know you like them ..I looked at all the halve's one's last night and removed the names...

A. 1 TA 1 LBA 11 Tackles 1 T Breaks 1 M Tackle 0 Offlads 2 Errors 118 Run M 155 KM 1 PC 0 RS
B. 0 TA 0 LBA 28 Tackles 0 T Breaks 2 M Tackles 0 Offloads 0 Errors 46 Run M 374 KM 0 PC 0 RS
C. 1 TA 1 LBA 15 Tackles 6 T Breaks 3 M Tackles 1 Offload 1 Error 159 Run M 305 KM 0 PC 2 RS
D. 1 TA 1 LBA 16 Tackles 0 T Breaks 3 M Tackles 1 Offload 0 Errors 65 Run M 249 KM 1 PC 0 RS..

And if only we had a fit hooker on the bench

 

[jirskyr]

It’s often weird to look at stats as I know you like them …I looked at all the halve’s one’s last night and removed the names…

You are making an argument for the consistency between all of the halves last night?

I am guessing B is Lachlan Lewis because he makes a lot of tackles, whereas I think C is Brooksie because of the tackle busts. I think the 2 errors belong to Benji, which makes him A and Cogger D. If I'm right, it shows how little the Dogs halves actually ran the football. And back to my argument earlier, that I think Benji and Brooks were forced to run a lot, both over 100m if I guess correctly, because of how bad the DH service was and the lack of structure outside them.

 

[Geo]

It’s often weird to look at stats as I know you like them …I looked at all the halve’s one’s last night and removed the names…

You are making an argument for the consistency between all of the halves last night?

I am guessing B is Lachlan Lewis because he makes a lot of tackles, whereas I think C is Brooksie because of the tackle busts. I think the 2 errors belong to Benji, which makes him A and Cogger D. If I'm right, it shows how little the Dogs halves actually ran the football. And back to my argument earlier, that I think Benji and Brooks were forced to run a lot, both over 100m if I guess correctly, because of how bad the DH service was and the lack of structure outside them.

Not really making an argument either way to be honest..you a correct with A B C and D..

More to the point C stands above or equal to the others statistically in every attacking and management stat.. Run Metres , TRY assists Tackle Breaks Repeat sets Kick metres ...yet never steps up never actually does like anything good like ever

 

[jirskyr]

More to the point C stands above or equal to the others statistically in every attacking and management stat… Run Metres , TRY assists Tackle Breaks Repeat sets Kick metres …yet never steps up never actually does like anything good like ever

Do you know, the part that I think is truly sad, is that I think Brooks has become a pretty handy footballer but this has only really occurred since The Big Four broke up. He's the only one that stayed and he's been paired with middling footballers since.

Now I can't say he is without fault, because it's taken him a long time to develop into a decent footballer. I often consider his defence, how he used to be such a liability and suddenly he's a rock, putting forwards on their arse week after week.

But if Tedesco had stayed or Brooks had found this form earlier, I am convinced you'd constantly be hearing about this beautiful partnership between Brooks and Tedesco, i.e. Brooks having someone strike to work with. You can't just be busy all the time without some complimentary players in your backline and, as you have noted, you can rack up all the good stats in the world, but many fans will only judge you on how often you win, how many solo tries you score or how many magic passes you throw.

 

[Jock Koss]

@jirskyr quite the magical pass to momi late in the game I thought as well. Was nothing doing really and that try was solely on Brooks/our one remaining decent centre (playing on the wing), credit to Esan and Nof they busted their guts on the other side of field but defence was soft through our middle for a period yet again.

If we stopped the bleeding even after conceding twice then it’d be a very different conversation now

 

[TheHawk]

@jirskyr he’s currently sitting third in the NRL for tackle breaks, but okay.

 

[tig_prmz]

thompson should've been used more. inside/outside of brooks/benji. very poor from either him or the person who devised the game plan.