![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
redfiona99In the previous post, I made a data-driven prediction of who England's quarterfinal team would be.
I went with Ackers, Bateman, Burgess, Hall, Radley, Knowles, Pearce-Paul, Sneyd, Tomkins, Welsby, Whitehead, Williams and Young.
I got 8/13 right - I'd forgotten how fond Shaun Wane is of Michael McIlorum, hadn't expected him to choose Tommy Makinson over Sneyd and Hall and I completely forgot about Herbie Farnsworth - my apologies to Farnsworth.
I will update my prediction, following an extra match's data, later.
It's more when don't they score?
There's a concentration of point-scoring moments 21-27 minutes, 48-49 minutes and then 75-79 minutes.
No new players are on that list, but that's still 17 out of a squad of 24 scoring.
And this is the matrix now:
There's been a major shift, and I think it's because a lot of the team that scored so many against Greece weren't in the quarterfinal match.
From how the figure looks now, there's still that central trio of Williams, Welsby and Young, then a second grouping of Makinson, Burgess, Hill, Bateman, Farnworth, Radley, Whitehead, Watkins and Tomkins.
Which is 12 players. The 13th player is the hooker and it's clear that Wane will pick McIlorum, even though the data suggests to go with Ackers.
The other interesting point, from watching the game, and it's interesting how watching and analysing at the same time changes the way you watch the game, but from that rather than anything that shows up in the data visualisations - England are so much better when Radley and Hill are on.
Which wasn't a sentence I was expecting to write.
It's not just scoring that dropped off without them, there was also an increase in handling errors.
Looking at when England concede:
I am still not sure how to cope with France being the opponent that scored the most points against England when they've played Samoa and Papua New Guinea.
It does seem to be the second half of the halves when opposition scores.
This is really skewed by the low number of points scored versus number of games.
Tom Burgess and Michael McIlorum are probably lighter on the figure than expected, and it's possibly that defensive ability that is the reason why McIlorum is being picked over Ackers.
The equivalent post for the semifinals will be delayed because yours truly will be at the Emirates watching it.
L will be acting as crowd control.
The only positive to Tonga losing is that it means I can now wholeheartedly cheer for England (I find it difficult to cheer against a team with Kristian Woolf and Konrad Hurrell).
I went with Ackers, Bateman, Burgess, Hall, Radley, Knowles, Pearce-Paul, Sneyd, Tomkins, Welsby, Whitehead, Williams and Young.
I got 8/13 right - I'd forgotten how fond Shaun Wane is of Michael McIlorum, hadn't expected him to choose Tommy Makinson over Sneyd and Hall and I completely forgot about Herbie Farnsworth - my apologies to Farnsworth.
I will update my prediction, following an extra match's data, later.
It's more when don't they score?
There's a concentration of point-scoring moments 21-27 minutes, 48-49 minutes and then 75-79 minutes.
No new players are on that list, but that's still 17 out of a squad of 24 scoring.
And this is the matrix now:
There's been a major shift, and I think it's because a lot of the team that scored so many against Greece weren't in the quarterfinal match.
From how the figure looks now, there's still that central trio of Williams, Welsby and Young, then a second grouping of Makinson, Burgess, Hill, Bateman, Farnworth, Radley, Whitehead, Watkins and Tomkins.
Which is 12 players. The 13th player is the hooker and it's clear that Wane will pick McIlorum, even though the data suggests to go with Ackers.
The other interesting point, from watching the game, and it's interesting how watching and analysing at the same time changes the way you watch the game, but from that rather than anything that shows up in the data visualisations - England are so much better when Radley and Hill are on.
Which wasn't a sentence I was expecting to write.
It's not just scoring that dropped off without them, there was also an increase in handling errors.
Looking at when England concede:
I am still not sure how to cope with France being the opponent that scored the most points against England when they've played Samoa and Papua New Guinea.
It does seem to be the second half of the halves when opposition scores.
This is really skewed by the low number of points scored versus number of games.
Tom Burgess and Michael McIlorum are probably lighter on the figure than expected, and it's possibly that defensive ability that is the reason why McIlorum is being picked over Ackers.
The equivalent post for the semifinals will be delayed because yours truly will be at the Emirates watching it.
L will be acting as crowd control.
The only positive to Tonga losing is that it means I can now wholeheartedly cheer for England (I find it difficult to cheer against a team with Kristian Woolf and Konrad Hurrell).
