Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 7:15 am  

Judder Man wrote:

Embarrassing stats: 46 missed tackles with 40% of them contributed by Wilkin, Walsh and Burns. Add in the factor of the very low completion rate in the first half, atrocious performance of the players.
Previous home game against Leeds: 49 missed tackless with Wilkin, Walmsley and Turner the major contributors. We don,t seem to learn anything about defence when playing Leeds.

Stat Wise Wilkin has now become the worst for missed tackles, penalties and caught up with Burns for errors, is this because he is playing "2 positions" during the game.

When is Vea back, we need some energy in the pack before Walmsley gets burnt out.

The important thing to point out here is that while Wilkin missed 7 tackles, and Burns and Walsh both missed 6, Wilkin made 37 tackles, while Burns made 23 and Walsh made 6. Between Turner who can't make decent defensive decisions, and Walsh who can't tackle, Wilkin spends a lot of time covering for the men outside him too, meaning tackles he isn't set or positioned well for. 7 missed tackles is poor no matter where you're playing or how many tackles you make, but Wilkin missing 16% of his tackles attempted is more comparable with Turner (16%), Fleming (18%) and Savelio (14%) than Walsh or Burns.

It's the same with penalties, yeah in absolute terms Wilkin is only one behind Burns. But the most penalised area of the game is the ruck. Our top 5 players in terms of giving away penalties are all in our top 8 tacklers. Yet Burns is number 1 for penalties, with 16 (Wilkin 15), and number 8 for tackles, with 345 (Wilkin 447).

Absolute values matter, but it's much more important to look at statistics in terms of amounts of work done. Dawson only missed 2 tackles, for example. But he only made 4.

Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 7:47 am  

Saint #1 wrote:

The important thing to point out here is that while Wilkin missed 7 tackles, and Burns and Walsh both missed 6, Wilkin made 37 tackles, while Burns made 23 and Walsh made 6. Between Turner who can't make decent defensive decisions, and Walsh who can't tackle, Wilkin spends a lot of time covering for the men outside him too, meaning tackles he isn't set or positioned well for. 7 missed tackles is poor no matter where you're playing or how many tackles you make, but Wilkin missing 16% of his tackles attempted is more comparable with Turner (16%), Fleming (18%) and Savelio (14%) than Walsh or Burns.

It's the same with penalties, yeah in absolute terms Wilkin is only one behind Burns. But the most penalised area of the game is the ruck. Our top 5 players in terms of giving away penalties are all in our top 8 tacklers. Yet Burns is number 1 for penalties, with 16 (Wilkin 15), and number 8 for tackles, with 345 (Wilkin 447).

Absolute values matter, but it's much more important to look at statistics in terms of amounts of work done. Dawson only missed 2 tackles, for example. But he only made 4.

Very good points. Walsh spent 80 mins trying not to make a tackle while Wilkin and Burns want to get stuck in.

No rugby player at any level can try and avoid contact. It's a full contact sport and it part and parcel of the game. If your afraid to tackle and afraid to take the ball in then you shouldn't be on the field.

I just hope KC lets walsh know that his post match comments was aimed at him and the others as it Might put some fight in him but I think he's lost his bottle

Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:03 am  

St pete wrote:

Very good points. Walsh spent 80 mins trying not to make a tackle while Wilkin and Burns want to get stuck in.

No rugby player at any level can try and avoid contact. It's a full contact sport and it part and parcel of the game. If your afraid to tackle and afraid to take the ball in then you shouldn't be on the field.

I just hope KC lets walsh know that his post match comments was aimed at him and the others as it Might put some fight in him but I think he's lost his bottle

I think Walsh will get better, just it'll be a gradual process. He was still tackled five times so at least he is willing to take a tackle if nothing else is on. He just doesn't look like he wants to run the ball. Obviously he was never the best defender but you'd imagine that being less affected by the confidence in his leg, you're more likely to see leg injuries done while carrying the ball.

Rumour has it Walsh has had a broken toe for the last few weeks too, which probably doesn't help. Turner plants his feet and sinks in just a tad CONSTANTLY too, which really hampers Walsh more than it does Turner.

Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:12 am  

Saint #1 wrote:

I think Walsh will get better, just it'll be a gradual process. He was still tackled five times so at least he is willing to take a tackle if nothing else is on. He just doesn't look like he wants to run the ball. Obviously he was never the best defender but you'd imagine that being less affected by the confidence in his leg, you're more likely to see leg injuries done while carrying the ball.

Rumour has it Walsh has had a broken toe for the last few weeks too, which probably doesn't help. Turner plants his feet and sinks in just a tad CONSTANTLY too, which really hampers Walsh more than it does Turner.

But could us letting him gain confidence in the field at such vital part of the season be costly for us ?

Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:26 am  

Saint #1 wrote:

The important thing to point out here is that while Wilkin missed 7 tackles, and Burns and Walsh both missed 6, Wilkin made 37 tackles, while Burns made 23 and Walsh made 6. Between Turner who can't make decent defensive decisions, and Walsh who can't tackle, Wilkin spends a lot of time covering for the men outside him too, meaning tackles he isn't set or positioned well for. 7 missed tackles is poor no matter where you're playing or how many tackles you make, but Wilkin missing 16% of his tackles attempted is more comparable with Turner (16%), Fleming (18%) and Savelio (14%) than Walsh or Burns.

Agree with most of that, with Wilkin I raised the question of whether Wilkin is playing "2 positions" in the game namely back row forward and half back and is covering more than he should. I like Burns a lot and although he missed quite a few tackles he does get stuck in and irritates the opposition all through the game. I don,t think we have an excuse for Walsh he,s just a lazy defender he can make some good tackles but generally he,s a soft tackler.
The interesting stats is that Saints are the 2nd worse team for missed tackles and yet has the 2nd best defence points against, this is suggesting we covering our line OK with a scrambling defence as individuals miss tackles, the problem with this is that it could be taking a lot of energy out of the team. We are also one of the worst teams for giving penalties away which adds extra defensive duties.
Its therefore no surprise we are gradually looking a bit tired and jaded when the problem is self inflicted by extra defensive stints, KC needs to get these 2 points addressed and improved upon.

Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:32 am  

St pete wrote:

But could us letting him gain confidence in the field at such vital part of the season be costly for us ?

I think it would be a risk worth taking, it looks as though we will finish in the top 4. Its a 50/50 when we come to the 8's whether Walsh will come through it, if he does,t still give us time to adjust. If Walsh does have a toe injury then that might explain why he is limping after the final whistle in the last 2 games.

Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:40 am  

Judder Man wrote:

Agree with most of that, with Wilkin I raised the question of whether Wilkin is playing "2 positions" in the game namely back row forward and half back and is covering more than he should. I like Burns a lot and although he missed quite a few tackles he does get stuck in and irritates the opposition all through the game. I don,t think we have an excuse for Walsh he,s just a lazy defender he can make some good tackles but generally he,s a soft tackler.
The interesting stats is that Saints are the 2nd worse team for missed tackles and yet has the 2nd best defence points against, this is suggesting we covering our line OK with a scrambling defence as individuals miss tackles, the problem with this is that it could be taking a lot of energy out of the team. We are also one of the worst teams for giving penalties away which adds extra defensive duties.
Its therefore no surprise we are gradually looking a bit tired and jaded when the problem is self inflicted by extra defensive stints, KC needs to get these 2 points addressed and improved upon.

I'm glad you posted that. I said pretty early in the season that defence was poor but I was shot down wirh "we have one of the best defence in the league". I posted that our one and ones and decision making was poor but we was covering well. I also posted that teams can only rely on cover tackles for so long and that's looking the case now especially with makinson out who does a hell of a lot of cover tackles.

The fact we've missed the 2nd most tackles points to what I said. We have players like Turner, walsh, Burns, greenwood and even Wilkin who defend on the edges but all miss 4 tackles plus a game.

The was one game (I can't remember now) where greenwood missed 4 tackles, Turner missed 5 tackles and Wilkin missed four tackles and they was all defending on the same side. That's 13 tackles on one side of the pitch and that spells problems.

We now have walsh in that equation who is missing more than he makes. I watched the leeds game back and if anyone is brave enough to watch it back then just watch Luke Walsh awful attempts. I couldn't show my face again after those attempts.

Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:44 am  

Judder Man wrote:

I think it would be a risk worth taking, it looks as though we will finish in the top 4. Its a 50/50 when we come to the 8's whether Walsh will come through it, if he does,t still give us time to adjust. If Walsh does have a toe injury then that might explain why he is limping after the final whistle in the last 2 games.

I wouldnt be so sure of top 4 finish come semi final time. It doesn't really matter if we in top 4 at the end of the regular season, it matters at the end of the super 8s.

We have two tough games in the regular season in Hudds at home and Wolves away. They are both 50/50 games plus we have hull KR the week before the semi final of the cup.

We have hudds, Cas and warrington breathing down our necks now. The top four is not a given for us.

Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:55 am  

The other observation is our line speed is very erratic and inconsistent, lots of games we wait for the opposition to run at us with a bit of momentum and quite often we surrender a couple of metres on every carry and become victims of an offload.
We,ve had a couple of games (probably v Wigan and Warrington) where we,ve got up into the opposition faces, a lot of teams do it to us quite often to nullify Roby,s distribution, so this is something else KC needs to look at.

When you think about it, we are making a lot of unnecessary work for ourselves, we have loads of improvement to make, the coaches and players need to adjust to play smarter.

Re: Shocker : Sun Jul 05, 2015 8:59 am  

St pete wrote:

But could us letting him gain confidence in the field at such vital part of the season be costly for us ?

Possibly for the next few weeks. However, the first few weeks back were always going to be the hardest and as long as we can weather that, I'd much rather be going into the playoffs with a fit Walsh at halfback than Wilkin, and I think we should still make the play offs regardless.

Judder Man wrote:

Agree with most of that, with Wilkin I raised the question of whether Wilkin is playing "2 positions" in the game namely back row forward and half back and is covering more than he should. I like Burns a lot and although he missed quite a few tackles he does get stuck in and irritates the opposition all through the game. I don,t think we have an excuse for Walsh he,s just a lazy defender he can make some good tackles but generally he,s a soft tackler.

I don't believe so. There was a few times on Friday that he ran across the line looking for a runner, but it was only a few. He's playing more like a loose forward, only on the left edge. Wilkin has always been one of our fittest players IMO, him and Roby. He made 37 tackles and 11 carries; Roby made 38 tackles and 13 carries, so it's not like he's doing an unreasonable amount of work.

I think probably the best indicator of the fact that Wilkin isn't playing two positions is this: when he has played in the halves, his stats are dramatically different to when he plays second row. In the matches where Wilkin has played the full game in the halves, he averages 21 tackles a match and 7.5 carries. In the matches where Wilkin has played in the back row (either full game, or Walsh started on the bench), he averages 33 tackles and 13 carries.

On Walsh being a lazy defender - I think he isn't lazy in as much as he's just a poor tackler. He also has no trust in Turner, and justifiably so, and this really doesn't help things.