Eels Blogs

Charles Dickens once wrote that “the most important thing in life is to stop saying ‘I wish’ and start saying ‘I will’. Consider nothing impossible, then treat possibilities as probabilities.” This line is from the semi-autobiographical David Copperfield (1850), and the Eels’ game against the Warriors was akin to a seminal moment in young David’s life. David’s idyllic early childhood is shattered when his mother marries the cruel Mr. Murdstone, whose punitive ways (like the Warriors) lead to David biting him and being sent away to boarding school. That is the Eels, for this final stage of 7 games and a bye. The Eels are squarely faced by the challenge of either growing up or dealing with more Murdstones. Welcome to Round 19.

Teams

Sunday 16 July, CommBank Stadium, Parramatta, 6:15pm (AEDT). Lands of the Burramattagal People. Referee: Chris Butler

EELS: 1. Clinton Gutherson 2. Maika Sivo 3. Viliami Penisini 4. Bailey Simonsson 5. Sean Russell 6. Daejarn Asi 7. Mitchell Moses 8. Reagan Campbell-Gillard 9. Brendan Hands 10. Junior Paulo 11. Shaun Lane 12. Bryce Cartwright 13. J’maine Hopgood 14. Luca Moretti 15. Joe Ofahengaue 16. Andrew Davey 17. Ryan Matterson 18. Ofahiki Ogden 19. Makahesi Makatoa 20. Waqa Blake 21. Matt Doorey 22. Haze Dunster 23. Isaac Lumelume.

Head coach: Brad Newly Disappointed Arthur

TITANS: 1. AJ Brimson 2. Alofiana Khan-Pereira 3. Brian Kelly 4. Aaron Schoupp 5. Phillip Sami 6. Kieran Foran 7. Tanah Boyd 8. Moeaki Fotuaika 9. Sam Verrills 10. Tino Fa’asuamaleaui 11. David Fifita 12. Klese Haas 13. Isaac Liu 14. Jayden Campbell 15. Chris Randall 16. Erin Clark 17. Jojo Fifita 18. Iszac Fa’asumaleaui 19. Jacob Alick 20. Keano Kini 21. Kruise Leeming 22. Ken Maumalo 23. Tony Francis 24. Thomas Mikaele.

Head coach: Justin Holbrook Des Hasler Who? Oh, Jim Lenihan. Who?

Notes: The Eels welcome back Moses, Gutho and RCG from SOO3, just as the Titans welcome back Fa’asuamaleaui, Fifita, Fotuaika and Brimson.

Observations from Last Week

Eels (vs Warriors), 10-46 (L), 44% possession, 69% completion rate, 3 linebreaks, 37 tackle breaks, 6 offloads, 38 missed tackles, 14 ineffective tackles, 12 errors, 5 penalties conceded, 2 ruck infringements, 0 sin bin. Pre-contact meters: Eels 6.05/run vs Warriors 6.71/run.

Titans (vs Dolphins), 21-23 (L), 48% possession, 87% completion rate, 8 linebreaks, 35 tackle breaks, 17 offloads, 43 missed tackles, 22 ineffective tackles, 9 errors, 5 penalties conceded, 2 ruck infringements, 0 sin bin. Pre-contact meters: Titans 6.87/run vs Dolphins 6.07/run.

Eels/Warriors R19 Lowlights HERE.

Titans/Dolphins R19 highlights HERE

The Eels were missing ¾ of their spine and RCG, but too many players missed too many tackles, and some had shockers in defence (Penisini) or attack (Sivo). I thought Simonsson was OK (15 runs, 131m, a nice solo try, 8 tackle breaks and saved at least two tries on the line (though 4 missed tackles)), and Lane made a promising return (45 mins, 11 runs, 92m, 5 tackle breaks, no missed tackles). But Brad Arthur summed it all up:

• “I’m disappointed in the performance. I thought we put a good enough team out to be better than that … Even in those losses earlier in the year, I was         unhappy that we lost but I was not disappointed in the effort and the performance … Our intent, mentality and attitude wasn’t good enough. That needs to be a one off”.

Both Titans (19/19) and Dolphins completed high (18/20) in the first half, but the Titans led 14-6 at H1. Yet a Milford-inspired attack, and increased line speed in defence, saw the Dolphins take the second half 17-7 to win 23-21. Both teams missed 35-45 tackles, made 8-9 errors, and conceded 6-7 penalties. The Titans had a second half siesta: Milford orchestrated three tries in 15 mins (47-63^rd minute). The Titans completion rate fell to 14/19 but the Dolphins sustained theirs at 16/17, and notably increased their line speed in the second half (see more on this below). Milford played right-side 5/8 and that might be a clue for Moses to take on the Titans line on that side too?

And now for something different.

We normally turn to immediately to the next section and focus on the upcoming game and whatever trends or talking points we can conjure. I will still do so – see next section ‘We Can Do It!’ – but HOE and I have been discussing a new performance metric. I want to apply it to the Eels vs Warriors game to show that a) yes, the Eels’ attitude was off, but b) we only played half a bad game of footy, so that c) we fixed the defensive problem on the run during the game, meaning d) do not panic.

The Eels played poorly against the Warriors but, with the risk of being called a unicorn, I want in this section to literally halve the problem and then, even worse, in the next section suggest a bounce-back is on the cards. Follow the argument and let me know in the comments if you are persuaded (or not). 

Please feel free to skip to this discussion of 'line speed', and how the Eels fluffed it for just one half, if you deem line speed irrelevant in understanding where the Eels are at right now.

First, the Eels were out-enthused and played with poor attitude. But only for half a game and not the full game. How did I reach that conclusion? It was not just due to the difference between 4-30 and 6-16 in the two halves. Our journey to understand my ‘only one bad half’ hypothesis begins with an article I read in the SMH, by Adrian Proszenko, published 8 July 2023. That article is about filthy QLD’s dominance over the Blues in SOO ‘23, which discussed ‘Pre-Contact Metres Per Run’. Here is the equation:

Pre-Contact Metres Per Run (PCM/run) is how far a player ran before anyone even tried to tackle him or her. We can expect fullbacks and wingers to have above-team-average PCM/run due to kick returns, moderated by the quality of kick-chase. But in general, PCM/run is a proxy for the line speed of the opposition. The lower your PCM/run, the faster the line speed of the opposition; inversely, the higher your PCM/run, the slower the line speed of the opposition. Always think ‘inverse relations’. A caveat: maybe a high PCM/run = ran like dinosaurs, right over the opposition, 'chased the collision'. Yes, possible; but we would then be looking at post-contact metres, line-breaks, play-the-ball speed, etc.

When thinking ‘inverse relations’, benchmark to what the above-article claims is the benchmark: on average a winning team has a PCM/run of 6.7 and a losing team on average a PCM/run of 6.4. Thus, Team X having a higher than 6.7 PCM/run suggests Team Y had below average line speed, the same as Team X having a lower than 6.4 PCM/run suggests Team Y had a higher than average line speed.

Now, to be transparent, here is the first-try table HOE and I compiled to capture pre-contact metres per run (PCM/run). Applying the formula is easy and we can generate PCM/run for each team, but how to contextualize all that data and present it in a meaningful way is the challenge.

First, though, the data suggests the benchmark of 6.7 (winning) and 6.4 (losing) is a fair benchmark. So, we will stick with this benchmark unless further analysis demands change.

Table 1: Pre-contact metres per run in Round 19 - using stats from NRL.Com

Second, the left column (HOE labeled it 'PCRM'; we will will use PCM going forward) is an indirect measure of the line speed of the opponent (team in parentheses). For instance, the Tigers (ladder rank 17^th) had less than average line speed and permitted the Sharks to run 7.24 PCM/run. The middle column (PRCM conceded) is an indirect measure of the line speed one team inflicted on the other: the Sharks were fast off the line and the Tigers could only manage a PCM/run of 5.74.

This is not an ideal way to present the data, but we are in the tinkering stage, learning on the trot, so please feel free to make suggestions in the comments!

Nevertheless, if we apply the equation to the entire Eels-Warriors game, we obtain (using NRL.Com): Warriors PCM/run 6.71 versus Eels’ PCM/run of 6.05. Recall the benchmark of 6.7 (winning) vs 6.4 (losing), or a differential of 4.69%. The differential in the Eels-Warriors game was a 10.91% differential. Thus, the Warriors’ line speed differential versus the Eels was 233% above the average differential between winning and losing teams. Some might just say ‘out enthused’ the entire game.

But you will note in Table 1 that winning the PCM/run does not guarantee victory. Souths ranked higher than the Dogs and the Titans ranked higher than the Dolphins. Yet both Souths and Titans lost. What this tells us is that we must break down PCM/run by each half.

If we use PCM/run in a more fine-grained way than simply total game average, we can see why reference to the two halves matter. Yet at that point we strike a hurdle, because NRL.Com does not break down stats by halves, only all-game. So we have to move over to FoxSports.com.au, because they break down games by both all-game and by each half. At that point we also note the numbers are different. Damn!

Table 2: NRL and FoxSports count differently.

Of course the variations in the minuend (total run metres) and subtraends (post-contact metres, all runs) alter the resulting pre-contact metres (PCM). But this is less importrant, I suggest, that what is seen when break down PCM by the two halves. First, if we calculate PCM/run for the Titans/Dolphins game using NRL.Com, we obtain Titans 6.87 vs Dolphins 6.07 = 13.2% differential. The Titans’ line speed differential versus the Dolphins was 281% above the average differential between winning and losing teams. But the Titans lost.

What this suggests is that greater line speed averaged over the course of the game is not the sole determinant. The coaching cliché is always that the game goes for 80 minutes, which is true but might obscure the fact that any given game can be won or lost in half that time.

To see how different stages of the game can matter, we turn to FoxSports.com and use their stats by each half, where we obtain the Titans’ PCM/run was 7.07 in H1 (Titans led 14-6) and 6.42 in H2 (outscored 17-7 by the Dolphins). The Dolphins increased their line speed in H2, restricting the attack of the Titans, and won the game in the second half.

What happens when we do the same breakdown for the Eels/Warriors? Using NRL.Com data, the Warriors all-game PCM/run of 6.71 versus the Eels’ all-game PCM/run of 6.05 suggests the Eels’ line speed was down and the Warriors’ line speed was up, creating a ‘rollover and little response’ effect. Yet now look at the breakdown by the two halves.

Switching to FoxSports.com, the all-game PCM/run is different for each team but still not flattering for the Eels and still confirming the Warriors out-enthused the Eels. We find an all-game PCM/run of 5.42 for the Eels and 6.33 for the Warriors (still a large differential (16.79%)). The data confirms the Warriors sustained a high line speed all game and suffocated the Eels’ attack. Yet when we go to the stats broken down by halves, a more revealing picture emerges. The Eels’ PCM/run was 5.39 in H1, to trail 4-30, and 5.44 in H2, this time outscored by only 16-6. The Eels’ make-shift spine never adapted to the Warriors’ fast line speed and neither did our forwards.

Yet the Warriors’ PCM/run in H1 was 6.88 and in H2 it was 5.81. Given that the lower the PCM/run the faster the line speed of the opposition - and we use the suggested benchmark of winning (6.7 on average) versus losing (6.4 on average) - the Eels had poor line speed in the first half and let the Warriors get away, but drastically increased their line speed in the second half and avoided an even bigger disaster (50+). Moreover, the Warriors stifled the Eels all game by maintaining a high line speed, but the Warriors’ own all-game PCM/run was brought back to the field quite substantially by better defensive intensity in the second half by the Eels.

We Can Do It!

My proposition, then, is that the Eels played one dismal half of footy but then got back to a semblance of fair line speed in the second half, though by then the game was lost.

But I think the Eels will bounce back in Round 20 and defeat the Titans. Touch wood and all that, but here are eight reasons why.

First, the Eels still enjoy a good record at home.

Second, Eels/Titans games have been high scoring affairs, yet although results of late versus the Titans have been close at the end, the Eels have an excellent record against the Titans.

Third, the Eels remain a better attacking unit (more points per game) and better defensive unit (less points conceded per game) than the Titans. Put your money on an 8-point victory. I'm actually not a gambler, in sports or especially romantic affiliations (losing sucks, best not to play ).

But I am going to place a margins bet this week on Eels by 1-12.*                                                                                                                                                                * Gamble responsibly

Table 3: Points for/against per game.

Fourth, the Eels’ record against Bottom 8 teams is to win 70% of those games. The Titans record against Top 8 teams is only 50%. The percentages favour the Eels. Besides, if you really think the Eels are faking it and they are ‘truly’ a Bottom 8 team, the Titans lose 60% of the time to Bottom 8 teams. We got this however you carve the pie. This is the kind of impeccable logic designed to make me look like a smart a**e, so no egg on my face, Eels, just no.

Table 4: Top vs Bottom 8

Fifth, the Warriors game was a complete anomaly for the Eels. Out of 8 losses, the Eels have lost 6 of those 8 games by 1-9 points, only losing by 10+ points twice. As Table 5 shows, the rankings for ‘big margin losses’ has Panthers as the best team (all losses by 1-9 points), daylight second, followed by Eels and Bunnies each with just 2 from their 8 losses being by 10+ points. Broncos and Sharks follow, each with three 10+ losses. I had prepared the bulk of this table a few weeks back, but it has become relevant to add context to R19's completely anomalous result for the Eels.

Table 5: Margins of Wins and Losses (R1-R19; excluding Bottom 4)

Sixth, the 2023 season has seen a host of blow-out victories where a team has racked up 40+ points. Yet the team that was thrashed then bounced back the next week (or the following week). The Eels will bounce back and bounce the Titans. As Dickens advised, we need to stop saying 'I wish' and start saying 'I will'. They will. The Eels will. We all will it. It will happen (actually overnight).

Table 6: After the Thrashing

Seventh, because the Titans telegraph their attack – “heh, we are going to try to score through our left-side attack” – even more than the Eels. Dear Mitchell Moses, please keep Cartwright informed (on your left shoulder) of your decisions, and for the love of flying spaghetti monsters please ask Penisini (on your right shoulder) to not get stood up repeatedly. OK, we’re good, this stat is so obvious even Dylan Brown could read the room on it.

Table 7: Try Location Analysis (courtesy statsinsider.com.au)

Eighth, the Eels are good at making metres against Bottom 8 teams; indeed, the Eels get better at stopping metre-gainage, against Bottom 8 teams, as the tackle count increases (or, as the set progresses). Table 8 below – thanks to the magical work at The Rugby League Eye Test (please read and subscribe, that fellow does amazing work) - depicts tackles 2, 3, 4 and 5. The Eels make good ground - metres gained - no matter who they play, though note the stark difference on Tackle 5 Bottom 8 vs Top 8. But we can expect the Eels to make good attacking ground on tackles 4 and 5 against the Titans. But after the Warriors game, Eels fans will want to see the stopping of metres gained. Recall Moses' kicking game forces opposition teams to start their sets (Tackle 1) closer to their try line than any other kicker. But against Bottom 8 sides the Eels are middling level on Tackle 2 (defensive), but good at defending tackle 3 and 4. What the Eels must do is have Gutho yell really really loud on that the 5^th tackle set, because the Eels need to pull their finger out and not be second worst defensive team on 5^th tackle. Easy, this is easy, it is right there in the stats what not to do.

Table 8: Play the ball analysis

The Bottom Line

So, look, I am just saying that so long as the Eels do not trail at half-time, we got this. Do not trail at half time, Dear Eels. In Rounds 1 to 19, the Eels are 0-6 if trailing at half time (a correction from last week; sorry), but 9-2 if leading or tied.

Table 9: Lead, Tied, Trail Analysis

The Warriors game was an anomaly.

The Eels played one bad half of footy.

Bounce backs happen.

I think I proved all three claims.

Eels will win.

Go Eels!