OFFICIAL Isaako released to Titans

[Sproj]

He wasn’t too bad but comfortably outplayed by his 18 year old opposite. Also, 40/20 (great nickname) Cooper was excellent.

 

[broncoscope]

I'd love for Isaako to get to a standard where he can be recalled but i just can't get over the continued brain farts he constatly makes.
He just doesn't seem to have the overall improvement needed to get to the next level.
Such a shame really.

 

[BroncosFever]

I'd love for Isaako to get to a standard where he can be recalled but i just can't get over the continued brain farts he constatly makes.
He just doesn't seem to have the overall improvement needed to get to the next level.
Such a shame really.

I said it a week ago, the brain fart in the Dragon's game will live long in the memories of the fans. You just don't see monumental **** ups like that very often.

He should be forgiven and given an opportunity to redeem himself but it won't be something that fans forget about.

 

[Huge]

He wasn’t too bad but comfortably outplayed by his 18 year old opposite. Also, 40/20 (great nickname) Cooper was excellent.

Do you mean Ben Farr?

 

[Sproj]

Do you mean Ben Farr?

Yes, Farr out man, that was obvious.

*I'll show myself out*

 

[Huge]

Yes, Farr out man, that was obvious.

*I'll show myself out*

The stats don't show that he was comfortably outplayed but I suppose it's possible. I guess it depends on what you think is important. Things like tackle breaks and missed tackles are important to some but maybe not to you. I mean Isaako broke three to Farr's none and Farr only made 3 tackles compared to Isaako's 12 yet Isaako didn't miss any yet Farr ,who only attempted 5 tackles missed 2 of them!! So, not really outplaying Isaako there. Mind you, that's only important if you rate defence and attack.

 

[Sproj]

The stats don't show that he was comfortably outplayed but I suppose it's possible. I guess it depends on what you think is important. Things like tackle breaks and missed tackles are important to some but maybe not to you. I mean Isaako broke three to Farr's none and Farr only made 3 tackles compared to Isaako's 12 yet Isaako didn't miss any yet Farr ,who only attempted 5 tackles missed 2 of them!! So, not really outplaying Isaako there. Mind you, that's only important if you rate defence and attack.

Yeah if you just look at stats pages and say mmhmm, those stats show so much more than the actual eyes. Farr wasn't the best player on the field by any means but neither was Isaako. Farr was throwing beautiful passes, had more running metres and did more than just pass a ball the other way which you think means Isaako set up the match winning try. There is no way you would have watched that game and thought, wow Isaako was good and in fact too good for this level when the kid with a handful of games was better, or even to humour you, comparable with Isaako.

 

[Huge]

Yeah if you just look at stats pages and say mmhmm, those stats show so much more than the actual eyes. Farr wasn't the best player on the field by any means but neither was Isaako. Farr was throwing beautiful passes, had more running metres and did more than just pass a ball the other way which you think means Isaako set up the match winning try. There is no way you would have watched that game and thought, wow Isaako was good and in fact too good for this level when the kid with a handful of games was better, or even to humour you, comparable with Isaako.

I just don't understand how your brain functions, truly amazing. I will try and dumb this down for you a bit and please, the words I use are sufficient. There's no need to rewrite them.

I didn't say mmmmm ' these stats show so much more than the actual eyes'.
You didn't say ' Farr was the best player by any means' and I didn't say Isaako was either.
I didn't say Isaako 'set up the winning try'.
I did say he headed right which drew the defence to the right ( factual) and then quickly fired the ball back to the left(factual) which helped create an overlap. Again, factual.
I did not say 'wow, Isaako was good and in fact too good for this level' however you did write this. Again, these are your words and classic strawmanning.

The stats were presented to assist in contrasting and comparison.
They clearly indicate to absolutely anyone , anyone at all that Farr's defence was awful whilst Isaako's was far better and Farr's complete lack of tackle busts compared to Isaako's three busts shows that his attack wasn't clearly better.

That doesn't mean that Farr didn't throw nice passes or that he didn't have a good game. Your perception of Isaako is questionable( in this game only ) You simply cannot acknowledge that Isaako did something things better especially in defence. His attack was also pretty solid if making three tackle busts counts for anything.

 

[BroncosFever]

Stats can be misleading, I think they are only really accurate on their own when looking at how many metres a forward made

For example, Tommy Dearden last year against the Dragons would have been credited with a try assist when Kotoni Staggs ran half the length of the field and beat the entire right edge on his own before giving Dufty a bit of wind burn, in that same play Dufty wouldn't have been credited with a missed tackle either (because he didn't even try to tackle him)

 

[theshed]

I just don't understand how your brain functions, truly amazing. I will try and dumb this down for you a bit and please, the words I use are sufficient. There's no need to rewrite them.

I didn't say mmmmm ' these stats show so much more than the actual eyes'.
You didn't say ' Farr was the best player by any means' and I didn't say Isaako was either.
I didn't say Isaako 'set up the winning try'.
I did say he headed right which drew the defence to the right ( factual) and then quickly fired the ball back to the left(factual) which helped create an overlap. Again, factual.
I did not say 'wow, Isaako was good and in fact too good for this level' however you did write this. Again, these are your words and classic strawmanning.

The stats were presented to assist in contrasting and comparison.
They clearly indicate to absolutely anyone , anyone at all that Farr's defence was awful whilst Isaako's was far better and Farr's complete lack of tackle busts compared to Isaako's three busts shows that his attack wasn't clearly better.

That doesn't mean that Farr didn't throw nice passes or that he didn't have a good game. Your perception of Isaako is questionable( in this game only ) You simply cannot acknowledge that Isaako did something things better especially in defence. His attack was also pretty solid if making three tackle busts counts for anything.

I’d prefer you watched the game before deciding to die on this hill. Isaako’s defence directly contributed to conceding a try under the posts. By no means am I saying it was all or even mostly his fault, nor am I saying that other fullbacks could have definitely done better. I will say his defensive game could’ve been better and I wouldn’t rely to heavily on the stats in this instance.

To be honest, I didn’t pay too much attention to Farr so I’m not commenting on his performance though he did look decent from casually viewing his game.

 

[1910]

Stats can be misleading, I think they are only really accurate on their own when looking at how many metres a forward made

For example, Tommy Dearden last year against the Dragons would have been credited with a try assist when Kotoni Staggs ran half the length of the field and beat the entire right edge on his own before giving Dufty a bit of wind burn, in that same play Dufty wouldn't have been credited with a missed tackle either (because he didn't even try to tackle him)

Even that it is questionable, what tackle did he make those metres on? Did he take the hard one at the start of the set or tackle four on the back of momentum- if I take the first hit up and make 8m but get a quick play the ball for you to take the next one and you make 12m on an edge you've fed off my good work and haven't really done more than me.

Backs wise too, Souths was a good example a week ago, Mam ran 80m in the first minute untouched after fielding a kick- he ended the game on 127m if you looked at that as a stat you'd just see that he ran 127m- that's good for a half but really it was 47m for 79 minutes and untouched fielding of a kick.

 

[Huge]

Stats can be misleading, I think they are only really accurate on their own when looking at how many metres a forward made

For example, Tommy Dearden last year against the Dragons would have been credited with a try assist when Kotoni Staggs ran half the length of the field and beat the entire right edge on his own before giving Dufty a bit of wind burn, in that same play Dufty wouldn't have been credited with a missed tackle either (because he didn't even try to tackle him)

I agree, stats can be misleading. I'd point out that they can also be extremely revealing too. I mean I hear that a lot on here, posters saying the stats don't tell the whole story and they are absolutely right. That said, any stats that don't suit a narrative are outright rejected especially if it's concerning a disliked player.

On here someone like Boyd or Isaako could have 5 try assists, 6 linebreaks, 37 tackles with no misses, zero errors and two tries and run for 195 metres and still posters would either say nothing or say, player x was 'okay'. People simply do not want to acknowledge anything good about a despised player and will intensely focus on any error, no matter how trivial.

Stats are important and can be both misleading and highly informative. Rejecting a stat purely based on malice is puerile.

 

[Huge]

I’d prefer you watched the game before deciding to die on this hill. Isaako’s defence directly contributed to conceding a try under the posts. By no means am I saying it was all or even mostly his fault, nor am I saying that other fullbacks could have definitely done better. I will say his defensive game could’ve been better and I wouldn’t rely to heavily on the stats in this instance.

To be honest, I didn’t pay too much attention to Farr so I’m not commenting on his performance though he did look decent from casually viewing his game.

What hill? I didn't say he played well or even average!! Wtf? I merely commented that the stats didn't indicate that the opposing fullback cleatly outplayed him. They also didn't indicate he had a bad game. No hills here.

 

[theshed]

What hill? I didn't say he played well or even average!! Wtf? I merely commented that the stats didn't indicate that the opposing fullback cleatly outplayed him. They also didn't indicate he had a bad game. No hills here.

I was referring to you arguing any point regarding Isaako in a game you haven’t watched. Regardless of what your opinion is. I’d rather you share an informed opinion that I don’t agree with than to argue for the sake of it without watching the performance.

 

[Huge]

Even that it is questionable, what tackle did he make those metres on? Did he take the hard one at the start of the set or tackle four on the back of momentum- if I take the first hit up and make 8m but get a quick play the ball for you to take the next one and you make 12m on an edge you've fed off my good work and haven't really done more than me.

Backs wise too, Souths was a good example a week ago, Mam ran 80m in the first minute untouched after fielding a kick- he ended the game on 127m if you looked at that as a stat you'd just see that he ran 127m- that's good for a half but really it was 47m for 79 minutes and untouched fielding of a kick.

I've never ever thought that stats tell the whole story and I clearly remember saying so in the past. I totally understand what you are saying. Years ago there was a bloke who really got huge wraps, his name was Jason Stevens. Time after time he'd make great hit up metres but a lot didn't notice why he was able to. He could because Danny Nutley made the tough hitup prior but Nuts had an extra talent. He would run as hard as Martin Lang but was as nuggety as Alan Cann and Nuts had a fabulous and fast ptb. This didn't show up in the stats and Stevens would get the glory because the defence was goingbackwards and anyone who tried tackling Nuts was left dazed and groggy!!

I know, stats alone don't mean the whole story has been told. I just hate people not acknowledging those stats that are favourable just because they dislike a player.

 

[Huge]

I was referring to you arguing any point regarding Isaako in a game you haven’t watched. Regardless of what your opinion is. I’d rather you share an informed opinion that I don’t agree with than to argue for the sake of it without watching the performance.

I don't need to practice medicine or experience polio to have an opinion. Like a lot, you only notice the times I respond and cannot know about the thousands of times I say nothing. I don't argue ANY point about Isaako, just the clearly unfair or downright wrong. Ionce again, I merely pointed out that the stats didn't show that Isaako was 'clearly outplayed by his opposite'. I might point out that his opposite was also on the losing side AND had the benefit of playing for a demonstrably better team. One could even argue Isaako's team on the day was better for his presence. Hell, didn't they beat the highflyers??

Joking of course, I don't claim Isaako had a great game.

 

[bronx89]

Honestly this fucking dribble has derailed the entire thread. Back on track fellas!

 

[mrslong]

There was a game on the weekend, the dying seconds of the first half and one team (I think perhaps the storm) put through a grubber that was sitting up in goal, and the defending winger (the young kiwi one??) grabbed the ball and took it dead. Frickin genius.