: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:43 am  

Gonna regret posting this. Hopefully these figures from the NRL's official stats people, Sportsdata will settle the inaccuracies posted when it comes to figures. Even the Canberra Times article is woefully wrong on Ellis.


Most tackles overall after 3 games: 1st. Hindmarsh 154, 7 missed, 9 ineffective

Ellis is 27th. with 86, 3 missed, 6 ineffective.


Half backs – Most tackles, Brett Kimmorley 74 (24.7 ave), 10 missed, 6 ineffective.
Chris Sandow FYI has missed 25 tackles already.


5/8th – Jarryd Hayne 67 tackles (22.3 ave), 3 missed, 5 ineffective
Matt Rogers has missed the most with 17.


So no halves at all at 30 tackles per game. Hindmarsh hasn't missed 13.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:13 am  

Rooster Booster wrote:

Gonna regret posting this. Hopefully these figures from the NRL's official stats people, Sportsdata will settle the inaccuracies posted when it comes to figures. Even the Canberra Times article is woefully wrong on Ellis.


Most tackles overall after 3 games: 1st. Hindmarsh 154, 7 missed, 9 ineffective

Ellis is 27th. with 86, 3 missed, 6 ineffective.


Half backs – Most tackles, Brett Kimmorley 74 (24.7 ave), 10 missed, 6 ineffective.
Chris Sandow FYI has missed 25 tackles already.


5/8th – Jarryd Hayne 67 tackles (22.3 ave), 3 missed, 5 ineffective
Matt Rogers has missed the most with 17.


So no halves at all at 30 tackles per game. Hindmarsh hasn't missed 13.

What is the difference between an ineffective tackle and a miss?

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:18 am  

dally messenger wrote:

good to see youve worked out finchy is an origin player.

well done

thats about the only sense in that post.

It is to somebody unable to comprehend simple english - I mentioned Finch's Origin record in my second post on the subject - do you really have issues with simple english? why not just calm down and answer some of the points rather than avoiding all the arguements - that is bit a difficult given your inability to read

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:29 am  

im assuming a miss is when you fall off, an ineffective may be if you are first into the collison but are not able to stop the players momentum and require another man to come in

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:30 am  

Eccleshill Rhino wrote:

It is to somebody unable to comprehend simple english - I mentioned Finch's Origin record in my second post on the subject - do you really have issues with simple english? why not just calm down and answer some of the points rather than avoiding all the arguements - that is bit a difficult given your inability to read

look id really like to point out all the mistakes you make but spud is getting upset at the whole situation so for his peace of mind ill let you say what you want.

i mean i get my info from watching the nrl and listening to experts like NRL on Fox.

poor spud gets advice from you.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:56 am  

Irregs #16 wrote:

im assuming a miss is when you fall off, an ineffective may be if you are first into the collison but are not able to stop the players momentum and require another man to come in

I've always taken an ineffective tackle as being one where the attacking player gets an offload away. I don't know that for sure though.

154 tackles with 7 missed is an excellent statistic by any standard.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:27 am  

Eccleshill Rhino wrote:

What is the difference between an ineffective tackle and a miss?

Ineffective tackle means that they can get the ball away. ie offload.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:27 am  

dally messenger wrote:

spud because you dont have a sense of humour and are getting upset over this ill stop making fun of ER.

he can post whatever he likes about the nrl in this thread and you can agree with him

ill keep the laughter to myself and not make it public.

oh i have a sense of humour....thats why i've pretty much stayed out of this one..i'm to busy laughing at what a idiot you are making of yourself

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:28 am  

roughyedspud wrote:

oh i have a sense of humour....thats why i've pretty much stayed out of this one..i'm to busy laughing at what a idiot you are making of yourself

so wanting me to be banned is a sense of humour

right spud.

i enjoy my time on here.

its not my fault many people on here dont have a clue about the nrl.

even if it was a poster i thought was a dope, if they say something that i think is good ill give them credit.

but when people just post obvious BS, well, they get what they deserve

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:33 am  

just to put it into perspective :

1. weve had the best tackler in the nrl critisised for his tackling technique and compared to mcguire. anyone that knows the first thing about the nrl knows nathan hindmarsh is the best tackler there.

i provided stats that show he does 50 tackles a game, i was told it was wrong. it wasnt wrong.

2. tim smiths form was laughed at. hes never done anything in the nrl. when i pointed out his nrl form was quite good, and indeed hed won the Dally M rookie of the year, the poster refused to listen.

3. brett finch was said to be a poor half back and danny mcguire better. when i reminded the person taht brett finch has not only played origin but also won them.

and if you go back to my original post, i didnt say mcguire was a bad player. all i said was i didnt think his defence was good enough for a 6 spot. many other people that seem to know about the nrl agreed with me.


ill conceed that halves and five eights make around 15 - 25 tackles a game, not the 30 i claimed.