The only stats that matter

Solar · Post: # 578773Post **Solar** » Sun 01 Jun 2008 8:59pm

68 tackles (17 a quarter)
114 contested possessions (28.5 a quarter)
39 one %'s (10 a quarter)

I think this sums up the match.... the line in the sand has been drawn, this is passable, anything less and the playing group is soft and weak. No excuses. Have those same stats next week and we will win.

my les foote · Sun 01 Jun 2008 9:12pm

Tackles are a good sign but the only stats that matter are:

Saints 19. 15. 129
Demons 7. 8. 50

Have these same stats next week and we will win.

cowboy18 · Post: # 578794Post **cowboy18** » Sun 01 Jun 2008 9:13pm

I was sure this was going to be the hitouts to advantage thread.

Eastern · Post: # 578798Post **Eastern** » Sun 01 Jun 2008 9:16pm

cowboy18 wrote:I was sure this was going to be the hitouts to advantage thread.

Mr. "Hitouts to Advantage" has changes his philosophy. He is now claiming responsibility for Matty Ferguson being BOG today

!!

Sun 01 Jun 2008 10:40pm

is b4eva also taking responsibility for 21s kicking too?

saint66au · Post: # 578964Post **saint66au** » Sun 01 Jun 2008 11:13pm

Last week we had 33 tackles between the entire team

Today the Top 5 tacklers, Bally, CJ, Joey, BJ and Dal had 34 between them

ace · Post: # 578968Post **ace** » Sun 01 Jun 2008 11:17pm

The only stat that matters is NOT in the eight and no hope of making the four.

Winmarvellous · Sun 01 Jun 2008 11:23pm

Melbourne is a lot different to Brisbane and the Bulldogs. The next two weeks will define our season. If we win, and I don't think we will, we can start thinking top eight again.

cowboy18 · Post: # 579328Post **cowboy18** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 2:55pm

Some more stats that matter. Raw data were corrected for trolling, spamming and reality to generate the graph.

Apologies for the quality, I made it the laziest way possible.

Post: # 579331Post **n1ck** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 2:58pm

Still brilliant Cowboy

ausfatcat · Post: # 579332Post **ausfatcat** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 2:58pm

cowboy is that for real or did you just make up the figures?

rodgerfox · Post: # 579334Post **rodgerfox** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 3:00pm

Solar wrote:68 tackles (17 a quarter)
114 contested possessions (28.5 a quarter)
39 one %'s (10 a quarter)

I think this sums up the match.... the line in the sand has been drawn, this is passable, anything less and the playing group is soft and weak. No excuses. Have those same stats next week and we will win.

With a different style of play - I'd confidently agree.

However, the way we play footy under Lyon I really don't think the above stats guarantee a win against a top 8 side.

Which quite simply, is a disgrace.

Dan Warna · Post: # 579337Post **Dan Warna** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 3:02pm

37.92% of stats quoted in conversation have no basis in fact
57.32% of stats quoted in web forums have no basis in fact
42.23% of stats quoted never add up to 100%

bob__71 · Post: # 579339Post **bob__71** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 3:05pm

rodgerfox wrote:
Solar wrote:68 tackles (17 a quarter)
114 contested possessions (28.5 a quarter)
39 one %'s (10 a quarter)

I think this sums up the match.... the line in the sand has been drawn, this is passable, anything less and the playing group is soft and weak. No excuses. Have those same stats next week and we will win.
With a different style of play - I'd confidently agree.

However, the way we play footy under Lyon I really don't think the above stats guarantee a win against a top 8 side.

Which quite simply, is a disgrace.

We won the richmond game and we didnt win the contested possessions. If we had of we would have killed them.

rodgerfox · Post: # 579343Post **rodgerfox** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 3:08pm

bob__71 wrote:
rodgerfox wrote:
Solar wrote:68 tackles (17 a quarter)
114 contested possessions (28.5 a quarter)
39 one %'s (10 a quarter)

I think this sums up the match.... the line in the sand has been drawn, this is passable, anything less and the playing group is soft and weak. No excuses. Have those same stats next week and we will win.
With a different style of play - I'd confidently agree.

However, the way we play footy under Lyon I really don't think the above stats guarantee a win against a top 8 side.

Which quite simply, is a disgrace.
We won the richmond game and we didnt win the contested possessions. If we had of we would have killed them.

Two things -

1) Richmond aren't a top 8 side
2) Safe to say we were quite fortunate to pinch that one

saint66au · Post: # 579354Post **saint66au** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 3:22pm

rodgerfox wrote:
bob__71 wrote:
rodgerfox wrote:
Solar wrote:68 tackles (17 a quarter)
114 contested possessions (28.5 a quarter)
39 one %'s (10 a quarter)

I think this sums up the match.... the line in the sand has been drawn, this is passable, anything less and the playing group is soft and weak. No excuses. Have those same stats next week and we will win.
With a different style of play - I'd confidently agree.

However, the way we play footy under Lyon I really don't think the above stats guarantee a win against a top 8 side.

Which quite simply, is a disgrace.
We won the richmond game and we didnt win the contested possessions. If we had of we would have killed them.
Two things -

1) Richmond aren't a top 8 side
2) Safe to say we were quite fortunate to pinch that one

Ergop we are not actually "flat track bullies" as we did not hammer them??

ctqs · Post: # 579385Post **ctqs** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 4:02pm

Dan Warna wrote:37.92% of stats quoted in conversation have no basis in fact
57.32% of stats quoted in web forums have no basis in fact
42.23% of stats quoted never add up to 100%

and 47.9% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Like My Les Foote said, the only stat that matters to me is the final score.

bigcarl · Post: # 579392Post **bigcarl** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 4:13pm

cowboy18 wrote:

very good cowboy.

seems fairly accurate, too.

ttufc7 · Post: # 579404Post **ttufc7** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 4:28pm

bigcarl wrote:
cowboy18 wrote:
very good cowboy. seems fairly accurate, too.

except for the happy banter. The incredible lack of optomism i have observed on this forum since sundays win is astounding.

If you can't find some happiness out of a big win regardless of the opposition you need some serious help

Smile people

bob__71 · Post: # 579430Post **bob__71** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 5:03pm

ttufc7 wrote:
bigcarl wrote:
cowboy18 wrote:
very good cowboy. seems fairly accurate, too.
except for the happy banter. The incredible lack of optomism i have observed on this forum since sundays win is astounding.

If you can't find some happiness out of a big win regardless of the opposition you need some serious help

Smile people

Totally agree...if you cant enjoy being a saint this week you should probably follow a different sport...or at least team....we won and next week we will win a gain

saintbrat · Post: # 579473Post **saintbrat** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 5:57pm

I have a query Cowbot18- how can Raph be included in those figures WHEN HE DIDN"T EVEN PLAY- I mean.........

Good work

esaint66 · Post: # 579535Post **esaint66** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 6:39pm

cowboy18 wrote:Some more stats that matter. Raw data were corrected for trolling, spamming and reality to generate the graph.

Apologies for the quality, I made it the laziest way possible.

Quality mate

cowboy18 · Post: # 579686Post **cowboy18** » Mon 02 Jun 2008 9:56pm

ausfatcat wrote:cowboy is that for real or did you just make up the figures?

It's real, but not in the conventional statistical sense. More in the "quantifying the saintsational zeitgeist" sense.

What's reality anyway?

The only stats that matter

The only stats that matter

Re: The only stats that matter

Re: The only stats that matter

Re: The only stats that matter

Re: The only stats that matter