and so because the missing data is either non-existent or not measurable does that always mean you'd discount and dis-trust the data set that does exist? I'd lean more to using the data that exists but with the caveat that it isn't always telling the full story. The context of the conversation is what would discuss that if needed.

Interesting that Buderus gets some stick from the Leeds fans for not performing to standard too. superleague.co.uk/statistics_pla ... eason=2010 Starts aren't too dis-similar on face value. Could there be something behind this about the style of the aussie hookers coming over here? They are or have both been world class players with big reputations.

Interesting that Buderus gets some stick from the Leeds fans for not performing to standard too. superleague.co.uk/statistics_pla ... eason=2010 Starts aren't too dis-similar on face value. Could there be something behind this about the style of the aussie hookers coming over here? They are or have both been world class players with big reputations.

Started me thinking this morning as to whether a player like Cameron Smith would even be suited to SL.

Did Swain make an impact because he was a solid non-flair hooker. Huge defensive workload for 80 mins and accurate passing from the base of the ptb as well as the occasional quality scoot and a good kicking game.

Maybe Berro, Cam Smith and Buderus are too flairly and that doesnt suit our game or Leeds game maybe?

On that note i've never compared Berro and Swain statistically as they are different players but thought this was interesting too: 2004 Swain v 2009 Berro superleague.co.uk/statistics_pla ... eason=2010 2005 Swain v 2009 Berro superleague.co.uk/statistics_pla ... eason=2010

On that note i've never compared Berro and Swain statistically as they are different players but thought this was interesting too: 2004 Swain v 2009 Berro superleague.co.uk/statistics_pla ... eason=2010 2005 Swain v 2009 Berro superleague.co.uk/statistics_pla ... eason=2010

and for context the 2009 Berro v 2008 Berro superleague.co.uk/statistics_pla ... eason=2010

and for context the 2009 Berro v 2008 Berro superleague.co.uk/statistics_pla ... eason=2010

Yes. Again, I'll refer back to my specific to the game example of Fitzgibbon/Tickle/tackling. Because we don't know exactly what the statistics are measuring and don't have a full data set, we have no idea what they are showing.

We'll agree to disagree then. Due to variables with most data sets in my line of work i'd have no metrics to work with at all if i started at the point of discounting data on that basis. As long as you know when looking at the metrics that certain variables have not been accounted for you can interpret the data accordingly.

For me i look at the data of player x making 500 tackles vs player y making 300. In my mind i look for the context. What kind of game time has each player had? What position in the defensive line does each player adopt? What are their styles? Whats the value add for play y's 300 tackles vs player x's 500. I look for all of the additionals to interpret the data. It doesnt mean i discount the figure, i simply look to rationalise it. I guess that comes from working where i do with the ambiguous data that i do.

Can you stop with this now? You say that the links you're posting are interesting, but why? You're just posting a list of numbers and pointing at them as though they have some sort of value. What is it, specifically, in game-related terms that you think they are showing?

When this was brought up earlier (rlhererl being the last example before you diverted the discussion back to your semantic driven comfort zone), you avoided any discussion and debate of what they actually meant and how they related to comparison between Berrigan and Houghton. Now you've brought another couple of players into the mix and still done nothing but point at the list of numbers as though that's meant to mean something. Well what does it mean?

So, going back to what I said about metres per carry, how can this be debated?

Metres per carry in simplistic terms would be the metres divided by carries. Metres would be measured by seeing where the ptb ball is and how many metres are made over the advantage like before been tackles. A carry would be each time a player takes it in and is tackles. I'd hope that a professional statistical research company capturing this data would have an agreed approach set down with guidelines as to what constitutes each metric. I'd also hope this has been derived in conjuction with the clubs to ensure it measures what they want measuring in the way that they want it measuring.

Sometimes simplicity is the best approach and ignoring variables and classing them as a working assumption that they are a constant is the best way of approaching these complex situations.