2023 NRL Round 1 Cronulla Sutherland Sharks vs. South Sydney Rabbitohs @ Points Bet Stadium Saturday 4 March @ 7:35pm

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,173
Reaction score
3,512
Watching the game still and the bunnies constantly trying to hold up the attacker ,drag them back or drag them over the sideline is so notable. Is this new for them this season? It seems the most effective sharks players were those smaller, lower running guys-Sifa, Cam, Jack-and I wonder if this is because they couldn’t be held up by the D so they managed to push through the stand up D. The bunnies hardly bend a knee in defense.
All teams train to get numbers in tackles.... but where the sets start is relevant. These gang tackles tend to happen when teams are coming out of their own end, because you can compress the defensive line. The Sharks were doing a lot of that and the Bunnies weren't.

Later in the second half the Sharks start to adjust and they start shifting wide to the centres coming out of trouble. This was to get around the compressed line. I'd like to think if Nicho is out there he recognizes that a bit earlier.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
28,593
Reaction score
5,061
Location
IN A BAR
The Bulldogs actually completed better than Manly.

Manly got 5 more penalties than the Bulldogs and scored 2 tries from intercepts. Those are recorded as completed sets and add 14% to their completion rate.

This is the thing. If completion rates were recorded based on how many times you had the ball and ended your possession in a positive way, it might be meaningful. The way it is recorded now tells you absolutely nothing. DCE scoring 2 intercept tries and the bunker fisting the Bulldogs doesn't mean that Manly are great at completing their sets.
I get it

But I'm not going to hold scoring tries or receiving penalties against a team.

"If completion rates were recorded based on how many times you had the ball and ended your possession in a positive way"
A positive way like a try or receiving a penalty?

Like all stats I understand that a single stat is not a definitive piece of information which determines an outcome with no other influences, ifs, ands or buts.

Fact is two teams who won had a completion rate only 1 or 2 % worse than opposition and every other team it was better.
If the Souths 31/41 looks better than our 25/39 partially due to them scoring an extra try which counted as a completed set that is still relevant to us losing.
If Bulldogs didn't want the Sea Eagles to have a better meaningless completion they shouldn't have conceded 4 extra tries and 5 extra penalties.

The higher completion does not cause you to win, but there is a correlation (generally) between the team with better completion, more tries and received more penalties and winning.

If Sharks have a high completion because it is padded by a bunch of tries that seems good to me.
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,173
Reaction score
3,512
I get it

But I'm not going to hold scoring tries or receiving penalties against a team.

"If completion rates were recorded based on how many times you had the ball and ended your possession in a positive way"
A positive way like a try or receiving a penalty?

Like all stats I understand that a single stat is not a definitive piece of information which determines an outcome with no other influences, ifs, ands or buts.

Fact is two teams who won had a completion rate only 1 or 2 % worse than opposition and every other team it was better.
If the Souths 31/41 looks better than our 25/39 partially due to them scoring an extra try which counted as a completed set that is still relevant to us losing.
If Bulldogs didn't want the Sea Eagles to have a better meaningless completion they shouldn't have conceded 4 extra tries and 5 extra penalties.

The higher completion does not cause you to win, but there is a correlation (generally) between the team with better completion, more tries and received more penalties and winning.

If Sharks have a high completion because it is padded by a bunch of tries that seems good to me.
Except that there isn't. You are just looking for a pattern based on the results from one weekend.
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,173
Reaction score
3,512
There isn't a correlation between the team with more tries winning?
There is a correlation between tries and winning, but it is weaker than you would expect.

There is no correlation between completion percentage and match result if the completions are between 60% and 85%. Outside of those ranges there is a VERY weak correlation. Nothing you'd bet your house on. It goes from ~50/50 to ~55/45.

@bort is trying to tell us that a difference of 1-12% in completion rate between any two teams who are both within the 60-85% range is relevant. It isn't.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
28,593
Reaction score
5,061
Location
IN A BAR
Except that there isn't. You are just looking for a pattern based on the results from one weekend.
If I look back to the previous weekend of play I can see Penrith completed at 56% and Eels at 44% and Penrith won that one, so I have at least two weeks of data now.

There is a correlation between tries and winning, but it is weaker than you would expect.

There is no correlation between completion percentage and match result if the completions are between 60% and 85%. Outside of those ranges there is a VERY weak correlation. Nothing you'd bet your house on. It goes from ~50/50 to ~55/45.

@bort is trying to tell us that a difference of 1-12% in completion rate between any two teams who are both within the 60-85% range is relevant. It isn't.
Your data doesn't address what I suggested though.

I'm suggesting if you want to win a game having a completion near to or better than your opponent would generally be a good idea.

I suspect teams who have a 10%+ better completion rate than their opponents win more games than those who have a 10%+ worse one.
Is there data around that?
What percentage of the time does the winning team have a completion better than their opponents?
Yeah it gets 'misleading' due to things like tries and penalties - those are good outcomes for the set. Good outcomes help with winning.
I don't think you can just complete to a certain minimum and expect to win. And there are many other factors which affect it, possession split being a big one.

I'm not saying you need to complete at X to win, I'm saying doing better than your opposition probably helps.
Or perhaps actually what I think is doing noticeably worse in this area than your opposition probably hurts.

I could be wrong though.
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,173
Reaction score
3,512
If I look back to the previous weekend of play I can see Penrith completed at 56% and Eels at 44% and Penrith won that one, so I have at least two weeks of data now.

Your data doesn't address what I suggested though.

I'm suggesting if you want to win a game having a completion near to or better than your opponent would generally be a good idea.

I suspect teams who have a 10%+ better completion rate than their opponents win more games than those who have a 10%+ worse one.
Is there data around that?
What percentage of the time does the winning team have a completion better than their opponents?
Yeah it gets 'misleading' due to things like tries and penalties - those are good outcomes for the set. Good outcomes help with winning.
I don't think you can just complete to a certain minimum and expect to win. And there are many other factors which affect it, possession split being a big one.

I'm not saying you need to complete at X to win, I'm saying doing better than your opposition probably helps.
Or perhaps actually what I think is doing noticeably worse in this area than your opposition probably hurts.

I could be wrong though.
I guess this helpful advice at a minimum. "Get out there and drop it less than them boys".

I agree with this statement. I just don't think 10% is a big enough difference to be considered "noticeably different", and imo over time it can be attributed to penalty/6-again count.
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,173
Reaction score
3,512
Also notable... the Sharks completions were 1/5 playing catch up in the final 7 minutes. At the 73 minute mark they had actually a better completion rate than Souths.

My feeling is that there is something in "sustaining a 65%+ completion percentage in each 10 minute period" or similar, rather than having a good looking completion rate at the final whistle because you went 95% for most of the game but 1 for 8 in a ten minute period. Just based on a small sample size of the last couple of Sharks games though.

Sharks breakdown was 5 errors in 40 minutes, 6 errors in 15 minutes, 0 errors in 18 minutes, 4 errors in 7 minutes.
 
Last edited:

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,173
Reaction score
3,512
Sharks 2022 completion % difference

Round (difference) result
1 (-3) L
2 (-12) W
3 (-3) W
4 (-4) W
5 (+4) W
6 (+3) L
7 (+1) W
8 (-7) L
9 (+4) W
10 (-11) L
11 (+4) W
12 (-4) L
14 (-7) W
15 (-13) W
16 (-7) W
17 (-3) W
18 (+2) W
19 (-7) L
20 (-12) W
21 (-7) W
22 (+20) W
23 (+6) W
24 (-18) W
25 (-11) W
FW1 (-2) GP-L
FW2 (-6) L

Record with negative diff > 7.5 = 5W-1L

Your hypothesis isn't valid for the 2022 Sharks (again, a very small sample size).
 

CHOGM

Great White
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
4,555
Reaction score
269
All teams train to get numbers in tackles.... but where the sets start is relevant. These gang tackles tend to happen when teams are coming out of their own end, because you can compress the defensive line. The Sharks were doing a lot of that and the Bunnies weren't.

Later in the second half the Sharks start to adjust and they start shifting wide to the centres coming out of trouble. This was to get around the compressed line. I'd like to think if Nicho is out there he recognizes that a bit earlier.
What about the holding up? The bunnies seemed to aim for that all the time, whereas the sharks not really. It’s a tactic to slow down the ruck right? Make the “tackle” go on longer.
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,173
Reaction score
3,512
What about the holding up? The bunnies seemed to aim for that all the time, whereas the sharks not really. It’s a tactic to slow down the ruck right? Make the “tackle” go on longer.
Are you saying that they are getting numbers in tackles and deliberately not putting the player to ground?

Was this all game, or just that period after half time? I'll re-watch and check it out.

Could be just related again to the Sharks not having compressed defence because the Souths sets started farther out, but I'd have to see the instances you are talking about to comment.

Defensively you would usually cover only ~60% of width the field when a team is coming off their own line, 80% when they reach half way, and 100% when defending your line. If a team starts a set on their 30 they won't be facing as many defenders as they would if they are coming off their 10.

It should be impossible to go through a team from inside your own end. The compressed defence is daring you to try to take risks and go around them.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
28,593
Reaction score
5,061
Location
IN A BAR
Are you saying that they are getting numbers in tackles and deliberately not putting the player to ground?

Was this all game, or just that period after half time? I'll re-watch and check it out.

Could be just related again to the Sharks not having compressed defence because the Souths sets started farther out, but I'd have to see the instances you are talking about to comment.

Defensively you would usually cover only ~60% of width the field when a team is coming off their own line, 80% when they reach half way, and 100% when defending your line. If a team starts a set on their 30 they won't be facing as many defenders as they would if they are coming off their 10.

It should be impossible to go through a team from inside your own end. The compressed defence is daring you to try to take risks and go around them.
The other question would be if they were consistenty getting more numbers in tackles were they spreading the ball more and us going one out more
 

Gards

Jaws
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
18,010
Reaction score
1,525
Location
At the Tucky
Also notable... the Sharks completions were 1/5 playing catch up in the final 7 minutes. At the 73 minute mark they had actually a better completion rate than Souths.

My feeling is that there is something in "sustaining a 65%+ completion percentage in each 10 minute period" or similar, rather than having a good looking completion rate at the final whistle because you went 95% for most of the game but 1 for 8 in a ten minute period. Just based on a small sample size of the last couple of Sharks games though.

Sharks breakdown was 5 errors in 40 minutes, 6 errors in 15 minutes, 0 errors in 18 minutes, 4 errors in 7 minutes.

Yea that last part of the game was essentially a write off because of all the errors and not hanging onto the ball. Not going to achieve much with so many mistakes in a short period of time. I don't think we were very productive after the Wilton try despite earning ourselves some more field position we butchered it.

Even if we just made 1 less mistake in that period we might have clawed back another try or at least kept Souths under a bit more pressure and fatigue instead of just handing momentum and control back to them (although they were making some mistakes as well IIRC). It got rather embarrassing for us actually. I think our players were gassed at this point, alot of blokes were just spilling balls they usually wouldn't.

Sometimes all you need is a good or bad 10 minute period to define a game for you

Then you had teams like the Bulldogs in the Desball days that valued high completion rates over the 80 mins but couldn't score points for **** so still lost pretty much every week.

Coaches like to talk about stats like completions and missed tackles as it puts the onus on the players and paints the issue as one of effort - not competence, structure, creativity or coaching.

This is especially useful in cases when a coach genuinely does not have a ****ing clue how to get his squad functioning and winning footy games.
Even when the dogs got blown off the park by 40 points it was cause of the completions... as if the Dogs having the ball more would have made a difference lol

Our left edge defense was a bigger issue than our last 8 mins of that game when we were chasing points. That left edge is where we lost the game - if it wasn't so leaky we may have been able to overcome our other issues.

To our coaches credit he didn't throw his players under the bus and admitted they as a group need to look at what happened in defense and address it.
 

Born&bred

Jaws
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
12,840
Reaction score
793
Location
The Bar
It should be impossible to go through a team from inside your own end. The compressed defence is daring you to try to take risks and go around them.
That reminds me of some of my junior coaching - show them the sideline and trust the cover defence (my preference) vs mark up from sidelines inwards and make them run up the guts...
 

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,173
Reaction score
3,512
That reminds me of some of my junior coaching - show them the sideline and trust the cover defence (my preference) vs mark up from sidelines inwards and make them run up the guts...
Yep. Just can’t play compressed defence in juniors without fast players on the edges, or else teams with quick kids will run sideways and get around you.
 
Top