PRE-GAME Round 20 - Broncos vs Cowboys

[Sproj]

We won't get the spoon. The Football Gods finished fucking us last week when they made Gamble deliberately headbutt that shoulder.

This week it's all one way love from those Sky Goblins. Get some cash on the Broncos, Staggs will do as he pleases and boy, it will please us. Last 8 team rugby league multi round and the Broncos to get us off to a flyer.

So you are saying the Dogs will lose or Broncos by 250+?

 

[theshed]

We won't get the spoon. The Football Gods finished fucking us last week when they made Gamble deliberately headbutt that shoulder.

This week it's all one way love from those Sky Goblins. Get some cash on the Broncos, Staggs will do as he pleases and boy, it will please us. Last 8 team rugby league multi round and the Broncos to get us off to a flyer.

Thanks for destroying the last dying embers of hope I had of a win with your cursed mutli predictions.

 

[Huge]

Don’t forget about boydy. But to be honest he’s probably had a hand in most of our tries this season..

Yes, fact. Best Bronco for try assists (top 25 in the NRL) and best Bronco for line break assists(Top 17 in the NRL). Apparently he was pretty good defensively playing in his non preferred position of centre.

Hard to believe DBs stats don't support the narrative. The stats must be wrong.

 

[Huge]

So you are saying the Dogs will lose or Broncos by 250+?

The Dogs won't win but the Broncos will, spoon avoided.

 

[Huge]

Imagine how far ahead the game would be if super league won! Ffs, it's crazy they are made out they tried to destroy the game.

Teams in Perth and Adelaide, further expansion into areas like Wellington likely, international 9s circuit, increased international games, increased tv coverage for years already..

And here's a crazy idea! Teams in a position on the ladder relevant to the level of support they receive due to an improved ability to fund their rosters! Roosters and storm at the bottom (storm would have the least fans if not for the multiple premierships from straight cheating when every other team was hamstrung, and their success wouldn't have ever started! This would mean less wrestle too!).

You are full of shit...sometimes!!

Not this time though

 

[Petch67]

Not on here you wouldn't have been. It has long been a fairly popular opinion.

Wasnt here mate....was one of those facebook groups back when i had an account

 

[WASSHHH]

Yes, fact. Best Bronco for try assists (top 25 in the NRL) and best Bronco for line break assists(Top 17 in the NRL). Apparently he was pretty good defensively playing in his non preferred position of centre.

Hard to believe DBs stats don't support the narrative. The stats must be wrong.

You and your stats

The Broncos results under Seibold tell you everything you need to know about the results a coach gets when they focus too much on numbers and not enough on what’s actually happening out on the field.

 

[abashii]

The Broncos results under Seibold tell you everything you need to know about the results a coach gets when they focus too much on numbers and not enough on what’s actually happening out on the field.

100%. Apparently Hasler went full stats weirdo at the Bulldogs, where he had spreadsheets that "proved" Aiden Tolman was the best prop in the world. Without anyone around to tell him to pull his head in you can see what happened there. Hopefully it won't take us nearly as long to recover from the awful position Morris, White and Seibold have put us in.

 

[GCBRONCO]

We won't get the spoon. The Football Gods finished fucking us last week when they made Gamble deliberately headbutt that shoulder.

This week it's all one way love from those Sky Goblins. Get some cash on the Broncos, Staggs will do as he pleases and boy, it will please us. Last 8 team rugby league multi round and the Broncos to get us off to a flyer.

 

[Huge]

You and your stats [emoji849]

The Broncos results under Seibold tell you everything you need to know about the results a coach gets when they focus too much on numbers and not enough on what’s actually happening out on the field.

Silly old stats hey. Rejected when they don't support the narrative and cherished when they do.

 

[WASSHHH]

Silly old stats hey. Rejected when they don't support the narrative and cherished when they do.

For such an incredibly (albeit self-proclaimed) smart bloke, you’re not very quick on the uptake are you.

Stats paint only part of the picture but in reality, only very little. There are so many other incredibly important facets of sport that they don’t measure, some like to call them the one-percenters.

However, most people already know that if you want to, you’ll find stats that support any argument you care to make. Sort of like you often do around here.

Nevertheless, as I’m sure you’ll take absolutely nothing away from this post; try hard not to forget that statistically, one out of four people is suffering from some form of mental illness. So check with three of your friends and if they’re OK...

 

[Galah]

Stats in rugby league are a very misleading thing. For example missed tackles, did old mate miss a tackle because he put himself in a bad position or did he miss a tackle because the guy on his inside made a horrible choice and it isolated him? Or did he miss a tackle because he made a last ditch cover tackle effort because someone else missed a tackle? I could go on and on.

 

[Huge]

For such an incredibly (albeit self-proclaimed) smart bloke, you’re not very quick on the uptake are you.

Stats paint only part of the picture but in reality, only very little. There are so many other incredibly important facets of sport that they don’t measure, some like to call them the one-percenters.

However, most people already know that if you want to, you’ll find stats that support any argument you care to make. Sort of like you often do around here.

Nevertheless, as I’m sure you’ll take absolutely nothing away from this post; try hard not to forget that statistically, one out of four people is suffering from some form of mental illness. So check with three of your friends and if they’re OK...

Ha ha. Those silly buggers, they may as well not do stats given how unreliable and useless they apparently are.

It makes you wonder about the numerous highly qualified and highly trained specialists worldwide and the businesses and companies whose sole reason or goal is to gather, collate and draw conclusions.

I guess they're all stupid and misguided. They should simply consult the internet where the real experts are to be found.

 

[Huge]

Stats in rugby league are a very misleading thing. For example missed tackles, did old mate miss a tackle because he put himself in a bad position or did he miss a tackle because the guy on his inside made a horrible choice and it isolated him? Or did he miss a tackle because he made a last ditch cover tackle effort because someone else missed a tackle? I could go on and on.

I'm sure that's never occurred to them. Just because they're experts and highly trained with access to every piece of information and have thought long and deeply about their field of expertise I'm certain they would never have thought of that. Durrr.

 

[abashii]

It makes you wonder about the numerous highly qualified and highly trained specialists worldwide and the businesses and companies whose sole reason or goal is to gather, collate and draw conclusions.

I guess they're all stupid and misguided. They should simply consult the internet where the real experts are to be found.

Hi huge! I literally do this for a living. As an experienced practitioner in my field I can tell you it's a rookie mistake to rely on statistics to the point you discard common sense when the numbers suggest otherwise. Sometimes they're too narrow a metric to explain the situation, other times they might just be flat out incorrect. My co-worker was recently awarded his doctoral thesis by showing the way a particular set of numbers was being interpreted and applied was not really appropriate given just that situation-while incredibly accurate our measurements were so narrowly focused they provided a misleading outcome when used to try and explain a broader situation. I've seen a fair few people come into the field with the misguided conception that numbers don't lie, especially ones coming from machines with lasers and enough algorithms to send Bill Gates into paroxysms of joy, but with experience one comes to understand they need to be treated like lawyers. Even if they don't lie, they might not be telling you what you think they are. Look very closely at what is being measured and consider how broadly you're trying to apply it.

 

[lynx000]

Hi huge! I literally do this for a living. As an experienced practitioner in my field I can tell you it's a rookie mistake to rely on statistics to the point you discard common sense when the numbers suggest otherwise. Sometimes they're too narrow a metric to explain the situation, other times they might just be flat out incorrect. My co-worker was recently awarded his doctoral thesis by showing the way a particular set of numbers was being interpreted and applied was not really appropriate given just that situation-while incredibly accurate our measurements were so narrowly focused they provided a misleading outcome when used to try and explain a broader situation. I've seen a fair few people come into the field with the misguided conception that numbers don't lie, especially ones coming from machines with lasers and enough algorithms to send Bill Gates into paroxysms of joy, but with experience one comes to understand they need to be treated like lawyers. Even if they don't lie, they might not be telling you what they think you are. Look very closely at what is being measured and consider how broadly you're trying to apply it.

Or better still, in the words of Billy Shakespeare ` The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers'.

 

[rnabokov]

Hi huge! I literally do this for a living. As an experienced practitioner in my field I can tell you it's a rookie mistake to rely on statistics to the point you discard common sense when the numbers suggest otherwise. Sometimes they're too narrow a metric to explain the situation, other times they might just be flat out incorrect. My co-worker was recently awarded his doctoral thesis by showing the way a particular set of numbers was being interpreted and applied was not really appropriate given just that situation-while incredibly accurate our measurements were so narrowly focused they provided a misleading outcome when used to try and explain a broader situation. I've seen a fair few people come into the field with the misguided conception that numbers don't lie, especially ones coming from machines with lasers and enough algorithms to send Bill Gates into paroxysms of joy, but with experience one comes to understand they need to be treated like lawyers. Even if they don't lie, they might not be telling you what they think you are. Look very closely at what is being measured and consider how broadly you're trying to apply it.

Or, as someone once said, "“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamp post; more for support than illumination”

 

[The Fisherman]

Hi huge! I literally do this for a living. As an experienced practitioner in my field I can tell you it's a rookie mistake to rely on statistics to the point you discard common sense when the numbers suggest otherwise. Sometimes they're too narrow a metric to explain the situation, other times they might just be flat out incorrect. My co-worker was recently awarded his doctoral thesis by showing the way a particular set of numbers was being interpreted and applied was not really appropriate given just that situation-while incredibly accurate our measurements were so narrowly focused they provided a misleading outcome when used to try and explain a broader situation. I've seen a fair few people come into the field with the misguided conception that numbers don't lie, especially ones coming from machines with lasers and enough algorithms to send Bill Gates into paroxysms of joy, but with experience one comes to understand they need to be treated like lawyers. Even if they don't lie, they might not be telling you what they think you are. Look very closely at what is being measured and consider how broadly you're trying to apply it.

Exactly right, you couldn't measure Wally by todays stats, unless you have stats for directing traffic, seeing opportunities no one else is seeing, and pulling off a big tackle that would change the course of a game, if stats were all there was to it, teams that were behind the eight ball with possession, missed tackles and completed sets would never win a game, often the teams with the better stats don't win, just my opinion.