Gee wiz, give the bloke a few games before writing him off FFS.

It is truly difficult to just watch 1 player for an extended period of time, I tried to watch JT but then i would find myself watching the ball again.  What i did see was ok, but there was rarely any "magical" moments from anyone.

Edited June 8, 20169 yr by AzzKikA

Quality about Trengove I really like. Doesn't get particularly flustered.Has ability to think and use ball well. He's very cool dude in traffic. Very handy.

On 6/8/2016 at 8:14 AM, beelzebub said:

Quality about Trengove I really like. Doesn't get particularly flustered.Has ability to think and use ball well. He's very cool dude in traffic. Very handy.

Plus as far as Tacklers go, he has a very good method, he's one you never see with clumsy high tackles or easily broken tackles, which is a very handy skill for an inside midfielder.

Trenners was by far our best user of the ball by foot on Saturday. Was really impressed with his kicking.

 

1 hour ago, stuie said:

Trenners was by far our best user of the ball by foot on Saturday. Was really impressed with his kicking.

 

Tyson says hello. 

 

Tyson 32 disposals (16 kicks) at 81.3% disposal efficiency

Trengove 19 disposals (10 kicks) at 68% disposal efficiency  

7 minutes ago, Powell said:

Tyson says hello. 

 

Tyson 32 disposals (16 kicks) at 81.3% disposal efficiency

Trengove 19 disposals (10 kicks) at 68% disposal efficiency  

Were you at the game? Did you actually read what I said? Do you realize disposal efficiency is pretty much the most useless stat there is? Do you realize handballs are included in DE? 16 handballs when you're a clearance player will up your DE a bit won't it? Did you even understand anything of what I wrote? So many questions....

Silly comment.

Edit - Also, Tyson: 6 clangers, Trengove 3.

 

Edited June 8, 20169 yr by stuie

30 minutes ago, stuie said:

Were you at the game? Did you actually read what I said? Do you realize disposal efficiency is pretty much the most useless stat there is? Do you realize handballs are included in DE? 16 handballs when you're a clearance player will up your DE a bit won't it? Did you even understand anything of what I wrote? So many questions....

Silly comment.

Edit - Also, Tyson: 6 clangers, Trengove 3.

 

Almost as silly as you including clangers, when Tyson had 13 more disposals and free kicks against are included.

Edited June 8, 20169 yr by Watts the matter

9 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

Almost as silly as you including clangers, when Tyson had 13 more disposals and free kicks against are included.

Clangers are disposals that go directly to the opposition, it's a more telling stat than disposal efficiency, especially when comparing a clearance player to an outside player.

Now, given Tyson had twice as many clangers but didn't have twice as many disposals, don't you think that cancels out using disposal efficiency?

 

1 hour ago, stuie said:

Were you at the game? Did you actually read what I said? Do you realize disposal efficiency is pretty much the most useless stat there is? Do you realize handballs are included in DE? 16 handballs when you're a clearance player will up your DE a bit won't it? Did you even understand anything of what I wrote? So many questions....

Silly comment.

Edit - Also, Tyson: 6 clangers, Trengove 3.

 

I was not at the game.

On clangers i find them to be one of the most useless stats, especially when we talk about clearance players, and in the wet when a lot of the kicks are thrown on the boot its even less of an indication of performance (Bernie Vince 8 clangers)

However to say Trengove was by far the best by foot on the day is a gross overstatement. You say that when you’re a clearance player handballs will put your DE up…. obviously this rule doesn’t apply to our skipper.  

Nathan Jones 16 kicks 15 handballs 62% DE

Dom tyson 16 kicks 16 handballs 81% DE

Jack Trengove 10 kicks 9 handballs 68% DE 

 

Watch the replay and see just how great his disposals was, he barely kicks it further than 40 meters, tyson kicks it 50+ regularly and in wet weather footy that is gold.   

 

1 minute ago, Powell said:

I was not at the game.

On clangers i find them to be one of the most useless stats, especially when we talk about clearance players, and in the wet when a lot of the kicks are thrown on the boot its even less of an indication of performance (Bernie Vince 8 clangers)

However to say Trengove was by far the best by foot on the day is a gross overstatement. You say that when you’re a clearance player handballs will put your DE up…. obviously this rule doesn’t apply to our skipper.  

Nathan Jones 16 kicks 15 handballs 62% DE

Dom tyson 16 kicks 16 handballs 81% DE

Jack Trengove 10 kicks 9 handballs 68% DE 

 

Watch the replay and see just how great his disposals was, he barely kicks it further than 40 meters, tyson kicks it 50+ regularly and in wet weather footy that is gold.   

 

Mate, I was at the game and have also watched the replay.

I think maybe you're getting mixed up with "most prolific" and "best user". I saw a lot of his kicks up close and his placement and weighting was fantastic, and really stood out compared to the rest of the team. If you look up what counts as an effective disposal then you'll see what a grey area stat it is. I could kick the ball 60 meters to a 2 on 1 contest in our favour, and even if the 1 defender wins the ball it counts as an effective disposal. In reference to Jones, I think you'd find that his kicking is what brought down his DE, he had a lot of hacks out of the middle that went to no one, which by definition is not an effective disposal.

 

4 minutes ago, Powell said:

 

 

Watch the replay and see just how great his disposals was, he barely kicks it further than 40 meters, tyson kicks it 50+ regularly and in wet weather footy that is gold.   

 

That's a worry. No penetration in kicking the ball. Fglad someone has taken emotion out of their observatuons. 

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

That's a worry. No penetration in kicking the ball. Fglad someone has taken emotion out of their observatuons. 

No, that's not what he said WYL. He said they used it differently by foot. Trengove generally kicked it shorter and to a team mates advantage, Tyson bombed it long more.

He looked to be running and kicking fine from close up, and I specifically remember one long kick that turned perfectly.

 

Just now, stuie said:

No, that's not what he said WYL. He said they used it differently by foot. Trengove generally kicked it shorter and to a team mates advantage, Tyson bombed it long more.

He looked to be running and kicking fine from close up, and I specifically remember one long kick that turned perfectly.

 

Let Powell answer what HE said Stuie. 

I can fcuking read you know. 

Was i talking to you?

12 minutes ago, stuie said:

Mate, I was at the game and have also watched the replay.

I think maybe you're getting mixed up with "most prolific" and "best user". I saw a lot of his kicks up close and his placement and weighting was fantastic, and really stood out compared to the rest of the team. If you look up what counts as an effective disposal then you'll see what a grey area stat it is. I could kick the ball 60 meters to a 2 on 1 contest in our favour, and even if the 1 defender wins the ball it counts as an effective disposal. In reference to Jones, I think you'd find that his kicking is what brought down his DE, he had a lot of hacks out of the middle that went to no one, which by definition is not an effective disposal.

 

I'm not getting mixed up at all, the simple fact is that a lot of trenners kicks were nothing kicks, to team mates 30-40 meters away and he also had some foul kicks to, eg: last quarter,  he hacks out of the backline to fly 30 meters (when he has time) going straight to Sam Mitchell's chest. 

Tyson however kicked long and true, and you may choose to ignore his DE of 81%, but in a wet game where similar players on both teams in the contest had markedly lower DE than him, then i think it's naive to ignore that stat, especially in a debate about who was the best by foot on the day. EG: Sam Mitchell 52% DE (18 kicks 9 HB) Jordan Lewis 69% DE (18 kicks 11 HB) Nathan Jones 61.3 DE (16 kicks 15 HB). 

Tyson got 10 coaches votes.

30 minutes ago, Powell said:

I'm not getting mixed up at all, the simple fact is that a lot of trenners kicks were nothing kicks, to team mates 30-40 meters away and he also had some foul kicks to, eg: last quarter,  he hacks out of the backline to fly 30 meters (when he has time) going straight to Sam Mitchell's chest. 

Tyson however kicked long and true, and you may choose to ignore his DE of 81%, but in a wet game where similar players on both teams in the contest had markedly lower DE than him, then i think it's naive to ignore that stat, especially in a debate about who was the best by foot on the day. EG: Sam Mitchell 52% DE (18 kicks 9 HB) Jordan Lewis 69% DE (18 kicks 11 HB) Nathan Jones 61.3 DE (16 kicks 15 HB). 

Stop quoting stats and watch the game mate. The more you quote disposal efficiency the more credibility you lose.

 

25 minutes ago, Devil is in the Detail said:

Tyson got 10 coaches votes.

You can't be this dense surely? Where has anyone said Tyson wasn't very good? My comment was that Trengove was our best user of the ball by foot. That's all.

FMD.

 

Just now, stuie said:

You can't be this dense surely? Where has anyone said Tyson wasn't very good? My comment was that Trengove was our best user of the ball by foot. That's all.

FMD.

 

Based on YOUR opinion. Based on MY opinion i didn't really notice Trengrove's field kicking. Where as I thought some of Dom's inside 50 entries were weighted well and delivered with accuracy.

Just now, Devil is in the Detail said:

Based on YOUR opinion. Based on MY opinion i didn't really notice Trengrove's field kicking. Where as I thought some of Dom's inside 50 entries were weighted well and delivered with accuracy.

Right, so now you're changing the point AGAIN. Ridiculous.

I was clarifying what was actually said, but somehow you missed the point for the second time in a row.

 

13 minutes ago, stuie said:

You can't be this dense surely? Where has anyone said Tyson wasn't very good? My comment was that Trengove was our best user of the ball by foot. That's all.

FMD.

 

Gosh you bite hard, i can hear his reel zinging now. 

 

3 minutes ago, Powell said:

Gosh you bite hard, i can hear his reel zinging now. 

 

Righto, and you "liked" the comment so I guess you're on the line too...

 

2 hours ago, Powell said:

Tyson says hello. 

 

Tyson 32 disposals (16 kicks) at 81.3% disposal efficiency

Trengove 19 disposals (10 kicks) at 68% disposal efficiency  

Tyson was sublime. That was vintage Dom Tyson, like the guy who arrived at our club and looked an A grader.

Ripping article by Matt Burgan.

http://m.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-06-08/tracking-trengoves-return-to-the-afl

Another good article on Trengove

http://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/16113487/jack-trengove-melbourne-spiritual-leader-afl

Looking forward to another step forward in improvement for Trenners tomorrow.

On 5 June 2016 at 1:39 AM, agent 99 said:

Reality is he was average and slow.

Is the AFL the place to find form or is that the job of the VFL?

I really dont see the hype, Sylvia had more up side and we all know how that ended.

sorry but Im calling it as I see it!

I wish he could prove me wrong.

 

 

webmaster / mods ---- 'dislike' / thumbs down button desperately needed