NEWS Oates: a bit surprised

[heartly87]

him too, amazing what decent centers can do

Oh bring back those days. The footy of 2015 was lovely to watch, it was fast and creative. I still to this day can't understand how we became so dull, year after year it just faded from view in the mirror.

Also Reed was very underrated here and he did the noble thing when his body broke down.

 

[Harry Sack]

I miss the red headed bastard. Was always a fan

 

[Organix]

Reed was my favourite at the time. Effort and passion was amazing.

 

[I bleed Maroon]

Jack Reed had more passion and commitment in his pinky finger than any of this current mob

 

[Huge]

He has like Hodges - not always flashy but highly dependable in both attack and defense when it counted.

Boyd couldn’t catch COVID-19 even if all the currently diagnosed patients from Victoria were to run at him!

Yet is the second best defensive centre in the comp...in a team getting flogged and conceding 26 points a game. Perception is everything.

 

[heartly87]

Yet is the second best defensive centre in the comp...in a team getting flogged and conceding 26 points a game. Perception is everything.

That second best defensive centre business was from a cherry picked stat that Baddel through out there. It was missed tackles vs effective tackles. Boyd had missed 7 and made 140 odd. There are other stats that determine if your overall the second best defensive centre. You can likely find others that prove our left hand corridor is on of the worst in the league at conceding points. There are no stats for when you just put your hands in the air and give up like he did agianst the Titans or when you already have rushed out of the line and have not engaged anyone to have a stat recorded. But good on him for having a 90.2% effective tackle, its just not the whole picture.

 

[K-Style]

That second best defensive centre business was from a cherry picked stat that Baddel through out there. It was missed tackles vs effective tackles. Boyd had missed 7 and made 140 odd. There are other stats that determine if your overall the second best defensive centre. You can likely find others that prove our left hand corridor is on of the worst in the league at conceding points. There are no stats for when you just put your hands in the air and give up like he did agianst the Titans or when you already have rushed out of the line and have not engaged anyone to have a stat recorded. But good on him for having a 90.2% effective tackle, its just not the whole picture.

The only thing preventing our left wing from being the worst defensive combo is our right wing.
Staggs Isaako was terrible. Farnworth Coates isn't much better (except for Mr Intercept saving us a few times). All players are ok one on one but we allow overlaps nearly every time.

 

[Sproj]

The left side, the experienced side with Oates, Boyd, Milford and Glenn, is repeatedly found one man short time and again each match. Why is that? Why hasn’t the coaching team identified and rectified this? Why hasn’t that left side themselves figured out the problem?

 

[McHunt]

The left side, the experienced side with Oates, Boyd, Milford and Glenn, is repeatedly found one man short time and again each match. Why is that? Why hasn’t the coaching team identified and rectified this? Why hasn’t that left side themselves figured out the problem?

They shuffled the problem.

 

[Sproj]

View attachment 8636

I’m not a fan of Boyd but plenty of players have been trampled by Ramien.

 

[Huge]

That second best defensive centre business was from a cherry picked stat that Baddel through out there. It was missed tackles vs effective tackles. Boyd had missed 7 and made 140 odd. There are other stats that determine if your overall the second best defensive centre. You can likely find others that prove our left hand corridor is on of the worst in the league at conceding points. There are no stats for when you just put your hands in the air and give up like he did agianst the Titans or when you already have rushed out of the line and have not engaged anyone to have a stat recorded. But good on him for having a 90.2% effective tackle, its just not the whole picture.

But it's not a bad thing is it? Your dismissive 'good on him' is an attempt to trivialize the stat, it's Trump like.

Also, don't other centres do the same thing? I mean it's a defensive decision they have to make every game but you present it as though Boyd is the only centre who does this. You don't mention the rest of the competitions centres yet you finish with 'it's just not the whole picture'.

If you were genuine you'd concede you yourself don't present the whole picture but doubtless there will be no acknowledgement of that because you start with a preconception, Boyd bad, must ignore all evidence to the contrary.

 

[Kooly87]

But it's not a bad thing is it? Your dismissive 'good on him' is an attempt to trivialize the stat, it's Trump like.

Also, don't other centres do the same thing? I mean it's a defensive decision they have to make every game but you present it as though Boyd is the only centre who does this. You don't mention the rest of the competitions centres yet you finish with 'it's just not the whole picture'.

If you were genuine you'd concede you yourself don't present the whole picture but doubtless there will be no acknowledgement of that because you start with a preconception, Boyd bad, must ignore all evidence to the contrary.

People have put up with two years of Boyd playing mostly awfully, so I think to an extent it can be easy, especially in the context of this season, to overlook the fact he hasn't actually been too bad at Centre, and probably highlights the face he should have made the move during last year at some point.

People insisting he's a terrible Centre are largely wrong, but I can appreciate in such a small sample size compared to a huge sample of awful games that people's memories are clouding their judgement somewhat.

 

[McHunt]

I’m not a fan of Boyd but plenty of players have been trampled by Ramien.

You love Boyd.

 

[rnabokov]

But it's not a bad thing is it? Your dismissive 'good on him' is an attempt to trivialize the stat, it's Trump like.

Also, don't other centres do the same thing? I mean it's a defensive decision they have to make every game but you present it as though Boyd is the only centre who does this. You don't mention the rest of the competitions centres yet you finish with 'it's just not the whole picture'.

If you were genuine you'd concede you yourself don't present the whole picture but doubtless there will be no acknowledgement of that because you start with a preconception, Boyd bad, must ignore all evidence to the contrary.

My take on this is that Boyd wasn't signed to be a good defensive centre. Why was he signed? For his experience, leadership, to be our FB, to coordinate our defensive line - his value to the team for those reasons.

The fact that he has very good tackling technique and tackles effectively one-on-one is only part of the picture. The overall context in which to assess his inclusion in the side is more than that, as many observe here and outside, Boyd is not a centre - he is a FB and a winger, and the only reason he is playing centre is that there is, on his performances to date, no where else for him to play. For mine, he isn't in the team for the reasons he was signed, similar to a lot of criticisms of Milford and Croft.

For mine, the only reason he is in the team is that the players, as reported in the media, hold him in high regard and given the alleged discontent in the side with some players having problems with Seibold, it would be ill advised at this point in time to drop him.

Again for mine, yes, Boyd does defend well in the centres. However, he does not offer much in attack, for example he too often carries the ball into the middle. His selection is a balancing act, a compromise, one we shouldn't have had to contend with.

 

[Kooly87]

My take on this is that Boyd wasn't signed to be a good defensive centre. Why was he signed? For his experience, leadership, to be our FB, to coordinate our defensive line - his value to the team for those reasons.

The fact that he has very good tackling technique and tackles effectively one-on-one is only part of the picture. The overall context in which to assess his inclusion in the side is more than that, as many observe here and outside, Boyd is not a centre - he is a FB and a winger, and the only reason he is playing centre is that there is, on his performances to date, no where else for him to play. For mine, he isn't in the team for the reasons he was signed, similar to a lot of criticisms of Milford and Croft.

For mine, the only reason he is in the team is that the players, as reported in the media, hold him in high regard and given the alleged discontent in the side with some players having problems with Seibold, it would be ill advised at this point in time to drop him.

Again for mine, yes, Boyd does defend well in the centres. However, he does not offer much in attack, for example he too often carries the ball into the middle. His selection is a balancing act, a compromise, one we shouldn't have had to contend with.

If we had a Centre absolutely banging down the door for selection I think I'd see it differently, but we honestly don't. Staggs has been on and off the field all season, Arthars is long term injured and Herbie had been playing bugger all Centre until his current inclusion.

Staggs return this week or next will be the first time I've really felt since Round 1 that there was much in the way of competition for Boyd to lose his spot to.

 

[Huge]

People have put up with two years of Boyd playing mostly awfully, so I think to an extent it can be easy, especially in the context of this season, to overlook the fact he hasn't actually been too bad at Centre, and probably highlights the face he should have made the move during last year at some point.

People insisting he's a terrible Centre are largely wrong, but I can appreciate in such a small sample size compared to a huge sample of awful games that people's memories are clouding their judgement somewhat.

Sure, we all can understand bias or preconception but I want to encourage people to attempt to see things as they are and to put their imagination to bed. I feel compelled to point out poor reasoning, biased commentary and downright lies when I see them. I hate the gutlessness of not admitting to error when appropriate, the silence when a mistake is exposed or a lie dragged into the light.

If more did so there would be a lot less strident criticism on here because posters wouldn't be so damn cocksure, they'd be a little more humble knowing they are fallible. That's the power of admission, it tends to give you a truer perspective and a more balanced system of reasoning.

 

[heartly87]

But it's not a bad thing is it? Your dismissive 'good on him' is an attempt to trivialize the stat, it's Trump like.

Also, don't other centres do the same thing? I mean it's a defensive decision they have to make every game but you present it as though Boyd is the only centre who does this. You don't mention the rest of the competitions centres yet you finish with 'it's just not the whole picture'.

If you were genuine you'd concede you yourself don't present the whole picture but doubtless there will be no acknowledgement of that because you start with a preconception, Boyd bad, must ignore all evidence to the contrary.

No it is not a bad thing and when I said good on him I meant it. As I also meant that it is not the whole picture. There is more to defense then just a completed tackle, such as did the player finish on the ground, did they still have the ball, did they land on their back or front, did they make post contact meters or did they get driven back, did they win the speed of the ruck, you know other factors that determine if a tackle is a good tackle or just a stat. These are the things that win you games not just a completed tackle. Yeah it is good to see ^90% effectiveness but unless your shutting down plays and dominating your opposition then your not the best or second best, it just that simple.

Trump like.. what the hell does that even mean, its a straw man is what it is. Your love of a fallen idol has made you blind to the obvious and deaf to reason @Huge. The reason I have for my stance on Boyd is not that he is just bad its he is not NRL standard, one positive stat will not change that.

 

[heartly87]

Sure, we all can understand bias or preconception but I want to encourage people to attempt to see things as they are and to put their imagination to bed. I feel compelled to point out poor reasoning, biased commentary and downright lies when I see them. I hate the gutlessness of not admitting to error when appropriate, the silence when a mistake is exposed or a lie dragged into the light.

If more did so there would be a lot less strident criticism on here because posters wouldn't be so damn cocksure, they'd be a little more humble knowing they are fallible. That's the power of admission, it tends to give you a truer perspective and a more balanced system of reasoning.

Oh lead us, infallible one.