: Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:13 pm  

STEVENM wrote:

Even if our levels are similar to last year,maybe other teams have improved theirs and why we are the second worst.

After this weekend its back to worst.

Taking that point though, the number of penalties per season (for all clubs combined) has varied by a huge amount. So...

...this is the percentage of penalties conceded by Leeds, of all penalties awarded in the season:

2003 8.80%
2004 7.29%
2005 6.98%
2006 6.71%
2007 7.80%
2008 8.23%
2009 8.65%

I wonder how any of that would compare to Graham Murray's Leeds?

There seems a general assumption that penalties should be eradicated but there's a reasonable case to say that penalties are the price you pay for contesting the ruck, being quick off the mark defensively and tackling with aggression. Its finding the balance that's key.

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:18 pm  

Puig-Aubert wrote:

After this weekend its back to worst.

Taking that point though, the number of penalties per season (for all clubs combined) has varied by a huge amount. So...

...this is the percentage of penalties conceded by Leeds, of all penalties awarded in the season:

2003 8.80%
2004 7.29%
2005 6.98%
2006 6.71%
2007 7.80%
2008 8.23%
2009 8.65%

I wonder how any of that would compare to Graham Murray's Leeds?

There seems a general assumption that penalties should be eradicated but there's a reasonable case to say that penalties are the price you pay for contesting the ruck, being quick off the mark defensively and tackling with aggression. Its finding the balance that's key.

I doubt wether that'd be worth it there appear to be far more penalties nowadays than in murrays era.

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:52 pm  

Puig-Aubert wrote:

After this weekend its back to worst.

Taking that point though, the number of penalties per season (for all clubs combined) has varied by a huge amount. So...

...this is the percentage of penalties conceded by Leeds, of all penalties awarded in the season:

2003 8.80%
2004 7.29%
2005 6.98%
2006 6.71%
2007 7.80%
2008 8.23%
2009 8.65%

I wonder how any of that would compare to Graham Murray's Leeds?

There seems a general assumption that penalties should be eradicated but there's a reasonable case to say that penalties are the price you pay for contesting the ruck, being quick off the mark defensively and tackling with aggression. Its finding the balance that's key.

I know its a bit different, but at the level we play at, we start the game looking to test the ref, and see what we can get away with at the breakdown. The potential price is a few penalties. The potential benefit is an extra second to organise your line, each tackle. Makes it worth trying.

However, the players should be able to know what they can and can't get away with by 10 mins into the match. Most of the holding down/interfering is just dumb, and killing us

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:55 pm  

leicester_rhino wrote:

However, the players should be able to know what they can and can't get away with by 10 mins into the match. Most of the holding down/interfering is just dumb, and killing us

Indeed.

The major flaw with Puig Aubert's attempts to cloud the obvious with statistics is it doesn't show whether Leeds were winning or losing the penalty count and that is the key.

If leeds averaged 7 penalties against a game under Smith it's not an issue if we're being awarded 15 as it means we're not giving away more territory and possession to our opponents.

What we do know, courtesy of TVOC, is that in the vast majority of games under M<clennan we have LOST the penalty count.

That is where the crunch lies not in the catual numbers.

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:25 pm  

G1 wrote:

Indeed.

The major flaw with Puig Aubert's attempts to cloud the obvious with statistics is it doesn't show whether Leeds were winning or losing the penalty count and that is the key.

If leeds averaged 7 penalties against a game under Smith it's not an issue if we're being awarded 15 as it means we're not giving away more territory and possession to our opponents.

What we do know, courtesy of TVOC, is that in the vast majority of games under M<clennan we have LOST the penalty count.

That is where the crunch lies not in the catual numbers.

Interesting.

Naturally, I (at least) have no agenda either way. The stats are what the stats are.

The discipline of some players has improved, for others it has got markedly worse. The stats do focus on Leeds's discipline - only half of any penalty count - as that's the area the discussion and criticism has focussed on. Unless, of course, you're suggesting that the coach should be chastised for his side not being awarded enough penalties?

There are some who have forcefully proclaimed that the high penalty count is caused by the current coach; others have unwittingly and amusingly followed in their wake; and others have simply chastised him for not solving the problem even if they recognise it probably wasnt of his making.

Of course you can interpret the stats however you wish but it would seem rather disengenuous to chastise the coach for apparently not trying to solve the discipline problem when a number of his charges seem to have curbed their penalties so well.

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:37 pm  

G1 wrote:

What we do know, courtesy of TVOC, is that in the vast majority of games under M<clennan we have LOST the penalty count.

That is where the crunch lies not in the catual numbers.

2008: I only have penalty counts for 29 of the 35 games played.

Leeds - Won 11, Drawn 3, Lost 15 (Penalties received 247, Conceded 259)

2009: Complete (All Comps)

Leeds - Won 6, Drawn 4, Lost 14 (Penalties received 165, Conceded 209)

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:00 pm  

Damo-Leeds wrote:

Missing is when your Widnes.

Best post on this thread

Lock IT

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:02 pm  

tvoc wrote:

2008: I only have penalty counts for 29 of the 35 games played.

Leeds - Won 11, Drawn 3, Lost 15 (Penalties received 247, Conceded 259)

2009: Complete (All Comps)

Leeds - Won 6, Drawn 4, Lost 14 (Penalties received 165, Conceded 209)

Gosh, things have gotten even worse under McLennan than I imagined. That is a terrible record this year.

If only you had stats for penalty counts won/lost under Smith. I suspect they would be very illustrative.

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:08 pm  

Puig-Aubert wrote:

Interesting.

Naturally, I (at least) have no agenda either way. The stats are what the stats are.

The discipline of some players has improved, for others it has got markedly worse. The stats do focus on Leeds's discipline - only half of any penalty count - as that's the area the discussion and criticism has focussed on. Unless, of course, you're suggesting that the coach should be chastised for his side not being awarded enough penalties?

There are some who have forcefully proclaimed that the high penalty count is caused by the current coach; others have unwittingly and amusingly followed in their wake; and others have simply chastised him for not solving the problem even if they recognise it probably wasnt of his making.

Of course you can interpret the stats however you wish but it would seem rather disengenuous to chastise the coach for apparently not trying to solve the discipline problem when a number of his charges seem to have curbed their penalties so well.

The point I have continually made is that this team and indeed this squad of players is more than capable of success if they could stop giving themselves mountains to climb with needless handing away possession and territory through lost penalty counts.

That we are conceding far more penalties than our opponents on such an alarmingly regular basis confirms something we have discussed about the deterioration in our relationship with referees.

Winning the penalty count (and respecting possession) are massive contributory factors in winning and losing in today's super league.

The self serving statistics you showed average penalties per game didn't look half as alarming or give the true picture as TVOC's statistics showing penalty counts lost.

How you're going to persue your agenda of defending the indefensible in light of this I await with baited breath.

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:09 pm  

G1 wrote:

If only you had stats for penalty counts won/lost under Smith. I suspect they would be very illustrative.

What makes you think that I haven't to some degree.....



..... other than my not reproducing them on here.