There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
URC Round 8: Munster vs. Leinster - 26/12/2023
-
19-12-2023 2:38pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Since this thread is currently lacking on spice, I think its time to play a game of...
IS JOE MCCARTHY REALLY THAT GOOD? A (SOMEWHAT) DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Last week, I promise one @[Deleted User] that I would re-watch Leinster v La Rochelle, IN FULL, with a focus solely on Joe McCarthy, in order to answer one bold question: Was this "the most promising performance by a young second row in recent memory"?
The layers of added spice have a fiery effect when you consider that two promising young second rows in good form are also playing in the Munster team this Stephen's Day. I'm sure there will inevitably be a Penny/Hodnett comparison made, but it won't be me doing it!
But lets get back to the key consideration at hand - Joe McCarthy vs La Rochelle.
WARNING: This is long; I try to look at basically everything he did in this game.
I am using this video in case people want to cross reference any points: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCoJCHiw7tE&ab_channel=RUGBYREPUBLIC
The analysis can be found above. Time stamps are from the match clock, not the YouTube video's time. Immediately, it gives rise to some interesting observations.
- One thing which was heavily praised by certain individuals in the Leinster thread was his Maul Defence. However, his maul defence was actually quite mixed across the board. If anything, his counter lifting (working with Baird as a counter jumper) was far more impressive from a lineout defence perspective than his maul work.
- Lots of grunt work, to be expected from a tighthead second row. Made for very interesting viewing and data tracking, I can assure you :/.
- His major negative contributions come in two main forms: penalties (a well documented criticism of his) and missed tackles. He brings excellent linespeed which doesn't come across in this purely stats based analysis; however he shoots up without setting his feet which means he often misses initial hits leaving the backrows hunting inside him to clean up the mess. Some could argue that this is by design, but other plays (notably Baird, I found) were able to bring linespeed AND make their first up hits behind the gainline, so I'm inclined to view it as a net negative.
- The spacing of the timestamps are interesting too - he does seem to come in bursts rather than being a totallic presence throughout the game. For example: each of his "dominant" first half carries are after four-to-five minute spells of inactivity. Obviously, some of this is down to kick-tennis happening during these periods, but there are other occasions where he is out of action either due to sucking diesel or placing himself wider in the defensive line (which on the rainy day it was in LAR, the ball never really got out that wide all too often).
- I have omitted scrums from the picture. Some argued that him scrummaging against Skelton was another thing to factor into account. In fact, McCarthy was scrummaging on Wardi/Allalatoa's side of the scrum, which was rarely problematic from a scrum penalty perspective. The real battle seemed to be Antonio/Skelton v Porter/Ryan.
Overall, is it the most promising performance from a young long in recent memory? I still think not. In fact, I'd argue Baird's performance in the same game was, upon re-watch, far more impressive than McCarthy's, albeit in the six jersey. As for my own claim, which was that he is "more liability than asset", that was probably the opposite extreme and a bit harsh. Indeed, from tallying up the total net positive/neutral/negative contributions, it would appear on this particular day, he was actually equal parts asset and liability (something which I did not have planned and I had a good chuckle at once I counted up all the colours).
Is the potential there? Absolutely. But he is not there yet for me.
Obviously, some of the attributions of positive/negative/neutral are open for discussion. I tried to grade his contributions in line with how sports analysts actually do the stats. Naturally, some will argue that some neutrals should be positive (and vice versa) and some negatives should be neutral (and vice versa) but I tried my best to be impartial in my analysis. Some stuff was on the edge (example: the 3:30 tackle on Skelton could've been a positive, while the 40:20 LAR turnover could've been a negative), but where there was doubt, I tended to opt for neutral.
Ultimately, while my view on McCarthy's performance probably went up after re-watch, I still don't think it was anywhere near the level some were claiming.
Discuss.
P.S. COME ONNNNN MUNSTER :P
Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on
8 -
-
-
-
-
As I said, I tried to do it in the way which the sports analysts themselves tend to do it. These have a very high bar for dominant in the tackle and carry stats for them to be considered +. Generally, neutral can be interpreted as "to be expected of a player in that situation" rather than not positive.
As I admitted, the Skelton tackle is arguable. However, I think any player would be expected to make the tackle on Bourgarit, hence it's a neutral. He didn't smash him, he didn't get run over, hence it's considered neutral.
Similarly for the 53;35 carry it's one where I hedged my bets and went neutral "effective" rather than "dominant". I can see where you're coming from though.
Generally for ruck time, positive cleans (from a data analytics perspective) involve clearing a threat and taking them to the deck. A regular seal over a tackler without taking out a man will always considered to be "effective" and neutral.
That's just the way these stats are done from my experience. They are, by their nature, picky and fussy and arguably hyper critical.
Again, can see where you're coming from. It is absolutely arguable that I short changed him on a few of those neutrals. I don't think any of the negatives were particularly harsh though (besides maybe the missed lift on Baird, which was fairly inconsequential in the grand scheme of things).
And as I highlighted in the OP, some of those neutrals could've been negative too if I wanted to be really anti-McCarthy. There was a LAR turnover off their own restart late in the game where McCarthy just kind of lingered over without doing anything - I have considered ticking him off for it but I felt the damage had already been done when two of his teammates had failed to remove the jackler.
Happy to be having this dialogue over it though! I'd rather this kind of discussion over stats (even if arguably selective) any day over the usual level of from discussion.
Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on
2 -
-
-
Advertisement
