Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:16 am  

markrammond wrote:

I thought that we played again very conservatively as per Widnes with only a few offloads and did not make many metres running as per last week at a bigger pack. Only one player made over 100 metres for us and also there were few clean breaks. In defence it was generally average with many players having 3 missed tackles and Moore close to double digits. O'C turned up late and made 0 tackles. It doesn't surprise me we conceded 44 points.

We were ripped off when one knock on was dropped onto a Broncos heel and re gathered whilst Hock should have seen red and was left on to set a try up, whilst Bishay should have grounded and we had a bad spell before half time which killed the game off.

Second half was a 6 point margin so better.

What was pleasing was Gigot with his brilliant kicking game, having been anonymous the week before. Cook, Cunningham, Krasniqi and Caton Brown were also really very good.

I thought the Leeds loanees were very quiet in attack and need to raise their game.

Mataitonga seemed a bit aimless when he got the ball and not keen to run.

What was pleasing is the ethos of working hard and the clubs youngsters like Lovell and Meek Mike did well.

It was a relief to see the team again that is for sure. I was shocked at a Widnes team who I see as borderline 8 and this was better, but progress is needed

Well based on Solomonas's tweet he should be here for the Bradford game so hopefully he can defend better than JOC on theiwng and contribute more in attack. Just hope he can gell quickly.

Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 12:21 pm  

RLLDN wrote:

Some great points mark. Was impressed by Gigots kicking ability and spatial awareness of the Hive pitch already also.

Think Mataitonga is getting a lot of unecessary criticism. Of course I understand the backs have to run forward when they receive the ball back in our defence....but I don't think he was moving aimlessly, but looking for gaps. See it from the Shauny Johnsons, Sam Tomkins how they are always looking and probing for the correct angle to make a break....hopefully in time we will see some exciting running Rugby from him.

The difference is when Tomkins has danced around a bit looking for a gap and can't see one he then carries the ball as fast and hard as he can into the line. Nesi either just passed it to another player or jogged gently into the line not making any yards.

Full Back's a tough position to play well, and if you haven't got balls you shouldn't play there. He looked like a union full back the way he was jogging about with the ball.

Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 12:42 pm  

Euclid wrote: Mark, very interested in your analysis. Is this your own or are you using a computer programme based on full coverage or stats? Any pro playing experience? This is a genuine enquiry (in the current climate on this board it seems necessary to say this) and I am interested in the basis for your thoughts. Hello Euclid, I played for a few years for Lancaster University. The highlights were in winning the SRL plate in a great game against Hull Uni and doing very well in the North West Championship and North West division two where we would regularly beat the other North West Unis. We had five student internationals at one point, but alas they graduated together and then we were well beaten most weeks when in the top flight against the likes of Leeds and Leeds Met. Certainly we had highs and lows, I remember us winning 50-0 one week and then losing by more than that the week after and the embarassment of being thrashed at St Helens College which was teenage lads against 18-21 year olds. I used to be on the Bench in the main, coming on as a Prop or Second Rower. Nowadays I run the Post Office Insurance business but earlier in my career I worked as a Data Analyst for a top ten UK building society and used to program data selections for egg.com so I am data literate to a degree and tend to really study the data from games as well as watching and also try to determine which players are critical to a team and how much contribution they make, which is why after a good few games I tend to start predicting games, though not always with success. I like to look at the superleague.co.uk stats, for example: http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/9917 Also data from other sources such as Rugby League Project (which is a tad incomplete), Love Rugby League and other sites In simple terms, most plays consist of a player making only 5 metres a drive, with no offload, a tackle occurring prior to a pass to a runner, no dummy runners and a tackle which holds down the player without penalty long enough for the defence to get back. Where you see genuine progress upfield is when one of these variables alters, i.e. more metres than 5 will typically result in the defence struggling to re-set, an offload will start to bring players in away from the ruck and against weaker defenders, runners will create additional fatigue by involving more defenders, a quick play the ball will result in the defence struggling to re-set, penalties are massive etc. The players I tend to not appreciate much are those who are involved in only the 'standard' play meaning that they never seem to make more than the basic 4-5 metres nor create room for the next man up. Where I feel we struggle is in overpowering the opposition (although the new players will help) but also with game intelligence, for example if we are gifted the ball, we have a tendency to assume it is a free play or try a miracle pass when we still have 5 tackles. Both will be solved in time I feel. Sorry for this long ramble Cheers Mark

Euclid wrote: Mark, very interested in your analysis. Is this your own or are you using a computer programme based on full coverage or stats? Any pro playing experience? This is a genuine enquiry (in the current climate on this board it seems necessary to say this) and I am interested in the basis for your thoughts. Hello Euclid, I played for a few years for Lancaster University. The highlights were in winning the SRL plate in a great game against Hull Uni and doing very well in the North West Championship and North West division two where we would regularly beat the other North West Unis. We had five student internationals at one point, but alas they graduated together and then we were well beaten most weeks when in the top flight against the likes of Leeds and Leeds Met. Certainly we had highs and lows, I remember us winning 50-0 one week and then losing by more than that the week after and the embarassment of being thrashed at St Helens College which was teenage lads against 18-21 year olds. I used to be on the Bench in the main, coming on as a Prop or Second Rower. Nowadays I run the Post Office Insurance business but earlier in my career I worked as a Data Analyst for a top ten UK building society and used to program data selections for egg.com so I am data literate to a degree and tend to really study the data from games as well as watching and also try to determine which players are critical to a team and how much contribution they make, which is why after a good few games I tend to start predicting games, though not always with success. I like to look at the superleague.co.uk stats, for example: http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/9917 Also data from other sources such as Rugby League Project (which is a tad incomplete), Love Rugby League and other sites In simple terms, most plays consist of a player making only 5 metres a drive, with no offload, a tackle occurring prior to a pass to a runner, no dummy runners and a tackle which holds down the player without penalty long enough for the defence to get back. Where you see genuine progress upfield is when one of these variables alters, i.e. more metres than 5 will typically result in the defence struggling to re-set, an offload will start to bring players in away from the ruck and against weaker defenders, runners will create additional fatigue by involving more defenders, a quick play the ball will result in the defence struggling to re-set, penalties are massive etc. The players I tend to not appreciate much are those who are involved in only the 'standard' play meaning that they never seem to make more than the basic 4-5 metres nor create room for the next man up. Where I feel we struggle is in overpowering the opposition (although the new players will help) but also with game intelligence, for example if we are gifted the ball, we have a tendency to assume it is a free play or try a miracle pass when we still have 5 tackles. Both will be solved in time I feel. Sorry for this long ramble Cheers Mark

Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 12:42 pm  

Tre Cool wrote:

The difference is when Tomkins has danced around a bit looking for a gap and can't see one he then carries the ball as fast and hard as he can into the line. Nesi either just passed it to another player or jogged gently into the line not making any yards.

Full Back's a tough position to play well, and if you haven't got balls you shouldn't play there. He looked like a union full back the way he was jogging about with the ball.

True, I see what you mean. There's always that get out clause of pace to get you out of trouble if the wall keeps approaching. Hopefully he is just finding his feet in the SL.

Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 2:09 pm  

markrammond wrote:

... In simple terms, most plays consist of a player making only 5 metres a drive, with no offload, a tackle occurring prior to a pass to a runner, no dummy runners and a tackle which holds down the player without penalty long enough for the defence to get back.

Where you see genuine progress upfield is when one of these variables alters, i.e. more metres than 5 will typically result in the defence struggling to re-set, an offload will start to bring players in away from the ruck and against weaker defenders, runners will create additional fatigue by involving more defenders, a quick play the ball will result in the defence struggling to re-set, penalties are massive etc.

Very little of which is seen in the "highlights" of course.

Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 2:43 pm  

Yes... absolutely, the highlights will by necessity show the losing side not falling to sustained continuous pressure but usually only a maximum of one successful tackle and then the score.

I always wish they would put some kind of 'tackle counter' on the screen to give context, e.g. is this the 5th set in a row that a team has defended?

If you watched Wigan v Sydney, you'd note that Wigan didn't really have the ball for the first 20-25 minutes and I thought they put in an huge effort to hold out against a team parked on their line, but a casual punter might just see that they have conceded a point a minute and think they couldn't defend at all, like us at Widnes on the last tackle

Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:06 pm  

markrammond wrote:

Yes... absolutely, the highlights will by necessity show the losing side not falling to sustained continuous pressure but usually only a maximum of one successful tackle and then the score.

I always wish they would put some kind of 'tackle counter' on the screen to give context, e.g. is this the 5th set in a row that a team has defended?

If you watched Wigan v Sydney, you'd note that Wigan didn't really have the ball for the first 20-25 minutes and I thought they put in an huge effort to hold out against a team parked on their line, but a casual punter might just see that they have conceded a point a minute and think they couldn't defend at all, like us at Widnes on the last tackle

That's my pet hate with RL highlights too, just tries and clean breaks. Often the tries are the least interesting bit of the process, show the hookers and props making 3-4 tackles in quick succession, show the big drives, show the best kick-chases etc.

Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 7:21 pm  

markrammond wrote: Hello Euclid, I played for a few years for Lancaster University. The highlights were in winning the SRL plate in a great game against Hull Uni and doing very well in the North West Championship and North West division two where we would regularly beat the other North West Unis. We had five student internationals at one point, but alas they graduated together and then we were well beaten most weeks when in the top flight against the likes of Leeds and Leeds Met. Certainly we had highs and lows, I remember us winning 50-0 one week and then losing by more than that the week after and the embarassment of being thrashed at St Helens College which was teenage lads against 18-21 year olds. I used to be on the Bench in the main, coming on as a Prop or Second Rower. Nowadays I run the Post Office Insurance business but earlier in my career I worked as a Data Analyst for a top ten UK building society and used to program data selections for egg.com so I am data literate to a degree and tend to really study the data from games as well as watching and also try to determine which players are critical to a team and how much contribution they make, which is why after a good few games I tend to start predicting games, though not always with success. I like to look at the superleague.co.uk stats, for example: http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/9917 Also data from other sources such as Rugby League Project (which is a tad incomplete), Love Rugby League and other sites In simple terms, most plays consist of a player making only 5 metres a drive, with no offload, a tackle occurring prior to a pass to a runner, no dummy runners and a tackle which holds down the player without penalty long enough for the defence to get back. Where you see genuine progress upfield is when one of these variables alters, i.e. more metres than 5 will typically result in the defence struggling to re-set, an offload will start to bring players in away from the ruck and against weaker defenders, runners will create additional fatigue by involving more defenders, a quick play the ball will result in the defence struggling to re-set, penalties are massive etc. The players I tend to not appreciate much are those who are involved in only the 'standard' play meaning that they never seem to make more than the basic 4-5 metres nor create room for the next man up. Where I feel we struggle is in overpowering the opposition (although the new players will help) but also with game intelligence, for example if we are gifted the ball, we have a tendency to assume it is a free play or try a miracle pass when we still have 5 tackles. Both will be solved in time I feel. Sorry for this long ramble Cheers Mark Not a ramble at all, very illuminating. I have played both codes to a decent standard and did a coaching course many years ago. It seems that this years team at least has more commitment than last years. Although I am not impressed by the triumvirate running the club that does not mean I don't want them to do well.

markrammond wrote: Hello Euclid, I played for a few years for Lancaster University. The highlights were in winning the SRL plate in a great game against Hull Uni and doing very well in the North West Championship and North West division two where we would regularly beat the other North West Unis. We had five student internationals at one point, but alas they graduated together and then we were well beaten most weeks when in the top flight against the likes of Leeds and Leeds Met. Certainly we had highs and lows, I remember us winning 50-0 one week and then losing by more than that the week after and the embarassment of being thrashed at St Helens College which was teenage lads against 18-21 year olds. I used to be on the Bench in the main, coming on as a Prop or Second Rower. Nowadays I run the Post Office Insurance business but earlier in my career I worked as a Data Analyst for a top ten UK building society and used to program data selections for egg.com so I am data literate to a degree and tend to really study the data from games as well as watching and also try to determine which players are critical to a team and how much contribution they make, which is why after a good few games I tend to start predicting games, though not always with success. I like to look at the superleague.co.uk stats, for example: http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/9917 Also data from other sources such as Rugby League Project (which is a tad incomplete), Love Rugby League and other sites In simple terms, most plays consist of a player making only 5 metres a drive, with no offload, a tackle occurring prior to a pass to a runner, no dummy runners and a tackle which holds down the player without penalty long enough for the defence to get back. Where you see genuine progress upfield is when one of these variables alters, i.e. more metres than 5 will typically result in the defence struggling to re-set, an offload will start to bring players in away from the ruck and against weaker defenders, runners will create additional fatigue by involving more defenders, a quick play the ball will result in the defence struggling to re-set, penalties are massive etc. The players I tend to not appreciate much are those who are involved in only the 'standard' play meaning that they never seem to make more than the basic 4-5 metres nor create room for the next man up. Where I feel we struggle is in overpowering the opposition (although the new players will help) but also with game intelligence, for example if we are gifted the ball, we have a tendency to assume it is a free play or try a miracle pass when we still have 5 tackles. Both will be solved in time I feel. Sorry for this long ramble Cheers Mark Not a ramble at all, very illuminating. I have played both codes to a decent standard and did a coaching course many years ago. It seems that this years team at least has more commitment than last years. Although I am not impressed by the triumvirate running the club that does not mean I don't want them to do well.

Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:14 pm  

markrammond wrote:

Yes... absolutely, the highlights will by necessity show the losing side not falling to sustained continuous pressure but usually only a maximum of one successful tackle and then the score.

I always wish they would put some kind of 'tackle counter' on the screen to give context, e.g. is this the 5th set in a row that a team has defended?

If you watched Wigan v Sydney, you'd note that Wigan didn't really have the ball for the first 20-25 minutes and I thought they put in an huge effort to hold out against a team parked on their line, but a casual punter might just see that they have conceded a point a minute and think they couldn't defend at all, like us at Widnes on the last tackle

You should offer your services to do coaching/video work and do the player by player snippets that the computer programme (whose name escapes me at the mo) offers up so players go and look at what they did in a game. You'd be good at that.

You clearly know what you're on about Mark.

Re: For those that went to The Hive and supported the Bronco : Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:33 pm  

Rooster Booster wrote:

You should offer your services to do coaching/video work and do the player by player snippets that the computer programme (whose name escapes me at the mo) offers up so players go and look at what they did in a game. You'd be good at that.

You clearly know what you're on about Mark.

Agree. We could do with the help!.....Opta stats right?