Game plans, tactics and all that jazz

[Its Time for Another 4,052]

On 4/26/2021 at 5:05 PM, binman said:

On 4/26/2021 at 5:05 PM, binman said:

I'm not convinced that we changed how we played or our game plan. In fact i would argue that we didn't. Why would we?

Like the tigers we have system that we will back in against any opposition. And when you have that mindset you don't flirt with a new game plan.

And more than that Goodies philosophy (and other system based coaches like Beveridge and Hardwick) as it relates to the game plan is a system that is predictable and based on repetition and role clarity. You don't mess with the system

 

 

I agree with you that the use of handballs wasn't a change in game plan. 

What I think it was, was an indication of a significant coming of age in the playing group. I think it showed that they are now able in the middle of a game to respond to a changing set of circumstances. In this case the Tigers opening with ferocious attack on the contests was leaving our players exposed and isolated and forced to dispose of the ball ineffectively under immense pressure.

The first thing I believe that happened after that first 15 minutes barrage was the players, in the moment on the field, realised they had to increase the support by getting more numbers back around the contests so we were no longer isolated. Once we did that we started to turn the tide. We then used the system around the contests Jordan Lewis said he has been teaching them to have strings of players away from the contest ready to release the ball further and further into space. This is a significant development of the game plan we've been waiting for years for. It's hopefully the end of the bees to the honey pot syndrome. 

Secondly we realised the way to retain control of the ball was not to always kick long to release pressure which is how I've seen MFC play forever and usually means top teams like the Tigers end up with our clearing disposals. Instead we used  handballs to clear into space and then look much further down the ground and if there aren't clear options kick short thus keeping possession. Salem is the master of this. I think this is the single most significant change in the way the team is playing that gives me the most confidence they are becoming a top 4 side. 

Running in numbers is the key to all of this. You can't run back deep in defence to help out or far in attack to create options if you don't have the fitness. You don't have the fitness until you've had enough years in the system and you have the right fitness people training you. We finally have a critical number of players who have been around long enough. We should have been here in about 2011-12 after the rebuilds started at the end of 2007. Instead of that we've waited through 3 1/2 rebuilds. I think there's only about 3 players left from when Roosy started. Gawn, T Mac, Viney. Salem's draft was the first under Roosy. 

There's so much else that's gone into this finally happening. But it mainly seems to be a critical mass of players reaching the number of games necessary to understand the game enough to respond to changing circumstances mid game and make the right decisions. Without that you have nothing. Those decisions are taught by the right coaches which we now appear to have. 

This week they are likely to face a lot less pressure at the face of the contest so will probably be able to get into space away from contests without needing to handpass as much. This won't be a change to the game plan it will be a response to the state of the game. 

Edited April 30, 2021 by It's Time

[ChaserJ 3,963]

And some analysis on our load management, which has us storming over sides in the last qtr (Burgo effect?):

https://www.statsinsider.com.au/blog/afl/unmasking-melbournes-superhero-power

[Grr-owl 1,075]

1 hour ago, Axis of Bob said:

I think the difference with the handballing we did is that most teams handball as a way of shifting the pressure away from themselves and on to a team mate, because they are under intense pressure. Handballing, in itself, isn't a bad way to play but it depends on how and why you do it.

Richmond relies on pressure around the ball to either turn the ball over or to force a longer kick down the line. Teams often feel this pressure and shift the ball to a safe player behind the ball (putting that player, who is in a worse spot, under pressure) or chip it sideways to a free player (which slows the game and forces a long kick down the line).

But there are only limited resources on the ground at any time, so you have to make choices about where to spend them. For example, we used Hibberd to tag which has advantages but also robs us of a line breaker. In Richmond's gameplan, they commit players to pressure around the ball and towards the defensive side of the contest, and commit them to defending the long kick down the line that results from that pressure. The tradeoff is that a composed short disposal forwards from the contest will be going into the gap where those pressure players have come from because they only have a finite amount of resources on ground. We exploited this gap with composed handballs to players who were taking the ball forwards. This took the pressure players out of play and forced their down-the-line defenders to come at the ball, which took away their defensive shape and allowed us to get some one on one (or better) looks near goal. 

To do this you have to be a good team with good footballers around the ball. Salem was wonderful at this by being able to absorb the pressure behind the ball and make great decisions that turned that pressure back against the Richmond tacklers.

Bob, this is correct. A super smart tactical shift that works. To counter it, teams employing Richmond's tactics will have to reallocate resources, and that necessarily weakens them.

[binman 37,950]

1 hour ago, Axis of Bob said:

We exploited this gap with composed handballs to players who were taking the ball forwards. This took the pressure players out of play and forced their down-the-line defenders to come at the ball, which took away their defensive shape and allowed us to get some one on one (or better) looks near goal. 

To do this you have to be a good team with good footballers around the ball. Salem was wonderful at this by being able to absorb the pressure behind the ball and make great decisions that turned that pressure back against the Richmond tacklers.

Exactly right AOB.

But we also exploited that gap with a lot of short, low risk kicks.

Low risk because they were short, so more chance hitting them. But critically they were generally along  the boundary line, so if the possessions chain were broken it often went over the boundary line and we got stoppage (giving us the chance to set up defensively AND take advantage of our two dominant rucks). And if the tigers won possession it less likely to be in the corridor.

I reckon Langdon has really improved his kicking this year, which is important as it is often him kicking down the boundary line (and Gus on the other side). But Salem is super important wit this kick. And i think Jordon is really important in this regard too. Very reliable kick who often goes short.

It's interesting actually because i think (but admittedly don't have the evidence) we are playing much more along the boundary line all over the ground than we have previously.  Think of how often we kick to the pockets in our forward line. And as noted above along the boundary line in transition.

We still sometime use the corridor to attack but i suspect we are using it much less than in previous seasons. 

Again i don't have the evidence,  but also i don't think we are crossing/switching as often. Which would make sense because we are playing through Max wherever possible. And less switching would probably create more predicable transition patterns (and i reckon they have tried to be more predictable in lots of other ways - something Tomlinson alluded to i think, in his footy show interview that is on the MFC website - ie that we have simplified our game plan). 

[Cards13 9,117]

On 4/26/2021 at 5:05 PM, binman said:

I'm not convinced that we changed how we played or our game plan. In fact i would argue that we didn't. Why would we?

Like the tigers we have system that we will back in against any opposition. And when you have that mindset you don't flirt with a new game plan.

And more than that Goodies philosophy (and other system based coaches like Beveridge and Hardwick) as it relates to the game plan is a system that is predictable and based on repetition and role clarity. You don't mess with the system

Was that David King opinion on that show the last bounce, or whatever it is? If so I'll watch it, and I'll listen to the clip EO linked above (thanks EO). Perhaps it is matter of semantics.

By that i mean sure we made some adaptions. We put hard tag on Dusty for one.  And we definitely played more tempo footy than we have thus far (though we have employed tempo footy in every game so far), with lots of patient build up and chipping it around - hence how many more marks and uncontested possessions we had. 

Is that changing the way we played? I would say not. The system and fundamentals remained exactly the same. A tweak yes, but not a significant change to how we play. And smart too as the tigers want pace on the game, so our tempo footy frustrated them and simultaneously allowed us to make sure our zones and structures were well set up. . 

On face value more handballs is not proof of a change to how we play. i would argue that it was a logical response to how the tiger play and the incredible pressure they put on the ball carrier.

And it is [censored] that we used more handballs so that when we turned it over we would still have numbers around the ball that would provide coverage.

We are territory  team like the tigers, but unlike them we are more focused on connecting with players in transition (the tigers are just happy to take ground and back their players to win win one on ones). And we use handballs to give to a player in space to make the connecting kick. Its just that other teams put pressure on so fewer handballs are  needed to get it to a player in space. 

So far from being a negative those handballs were a positive. Which team transitioned the ball better? Which team had more efficient inside 50s? 

Which is why it is weird furphy the comment i have heard a few times in the media (and from Hardwick in his post match presser strangely enough) about the tigers having plenty of inside 50s (60 to our 56) as evidence that they were no too far off the mark and that next time they were score more.

Bollocks. They only had 18 scoring shots from their 60 inside 50s. That wasn't a function of bad luck, that was a function of how we played and our system smashing theirs. 

I don't rate King at all. He just regurgitates stats. And often draws strange conclusions from them - as he seems to have in this instance.

And I have to wonder how closely he actually watched the game. The pressure was off the charts all game. Our system stood up. Our players stood up to that pressure. We are built for September finals pressure.

The tigers are the ones who struggled with the pressure, not us. They looked like they ran out of ideas on how to transition the ball.  And got frustrated.

So any comment along the lines that the Tigers would break down our 'handball game' is stupid on two fronts.

One, because we didn't employ a 'handball game'. We simply used handballs more than we have to respond to the tigers pressure. A clever adaptation by the players. 

And two, the tigers, despite their manic pressure, failed to exploit our high number of handballs and force turnovers. Their whole game is based on pressure on and around the ball carrier. They win so many of those contests. So often hey break down opposition possession chains. And they couldn't against us.   

The question King should be asking is will the tiger's game plan stack up against ours in Spetember?

 

Couple of points Binny, wasn’t it always an issue raised against Melb that we over handballed in the last, especially to get out of the contest with dinky little ones, but that just got us into trouble. So where is the change? Or is it just working now the players are better at executing/able to handle the pressure better?

In a similar vein the Dees age been on the taken to task for just bombing it long into fwd and it’s not a viable strategy, yet the media/Hardwick uses that stat of fwd 50 entries as a guide, laughable for mine.

Lastly the major change I’ve seen is tempo, they now know how to play with tempo, when to be 100% and when to wind the clock down, as we’ve all seen we’ve had no games this season where teams have kicked numerous goals in a row/no examples of us coughing up goals at the end of each qrt to cost us. 

[Axis of Bob 10,207]

4 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

Couple of points Binny, wasn’t it always an issue raised against Melb that we over handballed in the last, especially to get out of the contest with dinky little ones, but that just got us into trouble. So where is the change? Or is it just working now the players are better at executing/able to handle the pressure better?

I know it's going to sound really boring and cliche, but I think it's mostly to do with the players just 'playing their role' better.

We've always been really strong at the footy but we just haven't had anyone holding their position on the outside. This means that we have people ready to receive in better positions .... but also those players outside will drag defenders away from the ball and create opportunities for others. By not going for the ball (or sometimes even coming within a kick of the contest) you are able to stretch the defenders and stop them helping each other out. And that requires each of the players to know their role, even if that role is to stay the hell out of the play for a while until the play reaches a certain point.

The interview on the club site with Spargo is very good and shows a lot of this. He used the example of Brayshaw, a very good inside midfielder, who is playing as a specialist wingman. He's used to going in to grab the ball in contests and he's now having to run away from the ball to create space and lock up space in defence. That's a hard bridge to cross but he's doing a really good job of it at the moment. In 2018 and 2019, he averaged 10.6 and 9.4 contested possessions a game. In 2020 and 2021 he's only getting 6.5 a game and his overall disposal numbers have dropped significantly. His intercept possessions are well up as are his score involvements, which shows that even though he's not winning as much of the ball, the play that he's involved in is much more important. Last year he was a bit lost playing on a wing but he's playing his role much better and other players are benefiting from it.

One of the big stats I see for us this year is intercept possessions (differential) because it's a structural indicator. Last year the top 4 in this were Brisbane, Richmond, Geelong and Port.  Richmond have been top 4 in this since 2017. Teams don't just get unlucky and kick the ball to you, they do so because you force them to kick the ball where you have advantage. That's what we're doing. We have +10 intercepts per game, with the Bulldogs 2nd with +3.5. That's extraordinary and the only precedent is the (mostly!) dominant 2018 Richmond team who had +9. It probably won't continue at that level but it indicates a level of structural dominance over games. That's a whole of team stat too because intercepts involve multiple levels of defence: good field position, small forwards harrassing, inside mids pressuring, outside mids holding structure outside the contest, and finally the defenders winning the ball back from the rushed kicks that the rest of the team created.

[Cards13 9,117]

8 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

I know it's going to sound really boring and cliche, but I think it's mostly to do with the players just 'playing their role' better.

We've always been really strong at the footy but we just haven't had anyone holding their position on the outside. This means that we have people ready to receive in better positions .... but also those players outside will drag defenders away from the ball and create opportunities for others. By not going for the ball (or sometimes even coming within a kick of the contest) you are able to stretch the defenders and stop them helping each other out. And that requires each of the players to know their role, even if that role is to stay the hell out of the play for a while until the play reaches a certain point.

The interview on the club site with Spargo is very good and shows a lot of this. He used the example of Brayshaw, a very good inside midfielder, who is playing as a specialist wingman. He's used to going in to grab the ball in contests and he's now having to run away from the ball to create space and lock up space in defence. That's a hard bridge to cross but he's doing a really good job of it at the moment. In 2018 and 2019, he averaged 10.6 and 9.4 contested possessions a game. In 2020 and 2021 he's only getting 6.5 a game and his overall disposal numbers have dropped significantly. His intercept possessions are well up as are his score involvements, which shows that even though he's not winning as much of the ball, the play that he's involved in is much more important. Last year he was a bit lost playing on a wing but he's playing his role much better and other players are benefiting from it.

One of the big stats I see for us this year is intercept possessions (differential) because it's a structural indicator. Last year the top 4 in this were Brisbane, Richmond, Geelong and Port.  Richmond have been top 4 in this since 2017. Teams don't just get unlucky and kick the ball to you, they do so because you force them to kick the ball where you have advantage. That's what we're doing. We have +10 intercepts per game, with the Bulldogs 2nd with +3.5. That's extraordinary and the only precedent is the (mostly!) dominant 2018 Richmond team who had +9. It probably won't continue at that level but it indicates a level of structural dominance over games. That's a whole of team stat too because intercepts involve multiple levels of defence: good field position, small forwards harrassing, inside mids pressuring, outside mids holding structure outside the contest, and finally the defenders winning the ball back from the rushed kicks that the rest of the team created.

The intercept stat is incredible, I wonder if there is a breakdown for fwd intercepts, midfield and defensive intercepts to see where that is happening. If mainly in defence, while our defence at the minute is incredible injuries to Lever and one of the other pillars put is in some Issues potentially, but with the pressure we apply fwd of defensive 50 it still might not matter.

[Axis of Bob 10,207]

4 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

The intercept stat is incredible, I wonder if there is a breakdown for fwd intercepts, midfield and defensive intercepts to see where that is happening. 

I don't have access to it you could get an idea from players. That said, a midfield intercept may often created entirely by forward pressure, and a defensive intercept by midfield pressure etc. It's complex. But, FWIW, here are our top 10 interceptors:

Rank / Name / Games / Intercepts per game

1	Jake Lever	6	11.17
2	Christian Salem	6	7.67
3	Steven May	5	6.40
4	Max Gawn	6	6.17
5	Michael Hibberd	2	6.00
6	Angus Brayshaw	6	5.33
7	Jayden Hunt	6	5.17
8	Trent Rivers	6	4.83
9	Clayton Oliver	6	4.50
9	Ed Langdon	6	4.50

Interesting that they're all defenders in the top 8 aside from Gawn and Brayshaw. Also, over 11 intercepts a game from Lever is cartoonish. Nobody has finished a year with double figures since they've been keeping the stat.

[Cards13 9,117]

57 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

I don't have access to it you could get an idea from players. That said, a midfield intercept may often created entirely by forward pressure, and a defensive intercept by midfield pressure etc. It's complex. But, FWIW, here are our top 10 interceptors:

Rank / Name / Games / Intercepts per game

1	Jake Lever	6	11.17
2	Christian Salem	6	7.67
3	Steven May	5	6.40
4	Max Gawn	6	6.17
5	Michael Hibberd	2	6.00
6	Angus Brayshaw	6	5.33
7	Jayden Hunt	6	5.17
8	Trent Rivers	6	4.83
9	Clayton Oliver	6	4.50
9	Ed Langdon	6	4.50

Interesting that they're all defenders in the top 8 aside from Gawn and Brayshaw. Also, over 11 intercepts a game from Lever is cartoonish. Nobody has finished a year with double figures since they've been keeping the stat.

Everyone of those players is a defender or dropping back into D50, and wowee Lever!!! What a structure we have set up to date.

How long until they send a tagger to just follow Lever around? 

[Engorged Onion 9,255]

1 hour ago, Axis of Bob said:

I know it's going to sound really boring and cliche, but I think it's mostly to do with the players just 'playing their role' better.

We've always been really strong at the footy but we just haven't had anyone holding their position on the outside. This means that we have people ready to receive in better positions .... but also those players outside will drag defenders away from the ball and create opportunities for others. By not going for the ball (or sometimes even coming within a kick of the contest) you are able to stretch the defenders and stop them helping each other out. And that requires each of the players to know their role, even if that role is to stay the hell out of the play for a while until the play reaches a certain point.

The interview on the club site with Spargo is very good and shows a lot of this. He used the example of Brayshaw, a very good inside midfielder, who is playing as a specialist wingman. He's used to going in to grab the ball in contests and he's now having to run away from the ball to create space and lock up space in defence. That's a hard bridge to cross but he's doing a really good job of it at the moment. In 2018 and 2019, he averaged 10.6 and 9.4 contested possessions a game. In 2020 and 2021 he's only getting 6.5 a game and his overall disposal numbers have dropped significantly. His intercept possessions are well up as are his score involvements, which shows that even though he's not winning as much of the ball, the play that he's involved in is much more important. Last year he was a bit lost playing on a wing but he's playing his role much better and other players are benefiting from it.

One of the big stats I see for us this year is intercept possessions (differential) because it's a structural indicator. Last year the top 4 in this were Brisbane, Richmond, Geelong and Port.  Richmond have been top 4 in this since 2017. Teams don't just get unlucky and kick the ball to you, they do so because you force them to kick the ball where you have advantage. That's what we're doing. We have +10 intercepts per game, with the Bulldogs 2nd with +3.5. That's extraordinary and the only precedent is the (mostly!) dominant 2018 Richmond team who had +9. It probably won't continue at that level but it indicates a level of structural dominance over games. That's a whole of team stat too because intercepts involve multiple levels of defence: good field position, small forwards harrassing, inside mids pressuring, outside mids holding structure outside the contest, and finally the defenders winning the ball back from the rushed kicks that the rest of the team created.

Hail to the chief analyst - well well well done. Brilliant insight @Axis of Bob.

[binman 37,950]

35 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

Everyone of those players is a defender or dropping back into D50, and wowee Lever!!! What a structure we have set up to date.

How long until they send a tagger to just follow Lever around? 

Teams will definitely start trying to find a way to reduce the impact of our intercept marking, particularly lever, just as we did to the tigers.

But I'm not sure about tagging as such. It's a big call to basically give up one player to tag a player, even more so when that player is a defender.

I reckon our defensive structure is quite different to the tigers. And less susceptible to mitigation strategies like the one aob highlights (use of handballs etc).

Also i reckon a lot of our intercepts come post losing a clearnce as opposed to transition. That is hard to stop, other than not actually going forward from a clearance. Which would be a win for us. Catch 22

[binman 37,950]

The tigers dogs game is a fascinating game from a tactical perspective. Two distinct approaches.

I have tipped the tigers because I suspect their pressure will disrupt the dog's high in close handball/throw game.

I hope it does, because ot will be our blueprint too to beat team

 

[Grr-owl 1,075]

37 minutes ago, binman said:

Teams will definitely start trying to find a way to reduce the impact of our intercept marking, particularly lever, just as we did to the tigers.

But I'm not sure about tagging as such. It's a big call to basically give up one player to tag a player, even more so when that player is a defender.

I reckon our defensive structure is quite different to the tigers. And less susceptible to mitigation strategies like the one aob highlights (use of handballs etc).

Also i reckon a lot of our intercepts come post losing a clearnce as opposed to transition. That is hard to stop, other than not actually going forward from a clearance. Which would be a win for us. Catch 22

They'll have to go over Lever, or around, as we did to Grimes. 

[Axis of Bob 10,207]

 

20 minutes ago, binman said:

The tigers dogs game is a fascinating game from a tactical perspective. Two distinct approaches.

I have tipped the tigers because I suspect their pressure will disrupt the dog's high in close handball/throw game.

I hope it does, because ot will be our blueprint too to beat team

 

I’m watching too. Already it looks like the Dogs trying to handball through, but the second tall is a real issue for them. Very interesting.

[Fanatique Demon 2,387]

9 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

6 Angus Brayshaw 6 5.33

Great to see Angus having an impact. He was often criticised last year for not bringing enough defensive effort. Go Angus!

[Binmans PA 25,993]

8 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

 

I’m watching too. Already it looks like the Dogs trying to handball through, but the second tall is a real issue for them. Very interesting.

Comparatively, I think this is where our outside pace really helped us against Richmond. Having Hunt and Langdon as outlets really changes our dynamic and gives us a point of difference. Outside of JJ, who doesn't seem to be the same player he was in 2016, who breaks the lines for the Bulldogs? It's mostly a transition thing by handball for them, whereas we've become a real run and carry team off half back.

[binman 37,950]

6 hours ago, A F said:

Comparatively, I think this is where our outside pace really helped us against Richmond. Having Hunt and Langdon as outlets really changes our dynamic and gives us a point of difference. Outside of JJ, who doesn't seem to be the same player he was in 2016, who breaks the lines for the Bulldogs? It's mostly a transition thing by handball for them, whereas we've become a real run and carry team off half back.

Agree. 

But also the way we used  our handballs was different. We used long handballs to get it away from the contest, almost like a shirt kick.

But that won't stop King saying something like:

'See i told you the handball game Melbourne employed, you know the fundamental change to their game plan i pointed out, would break down under the tigers finals pressure'

[Grr-owl 1,075]

22 hours ago, Cards13 said:

The intercept stat is incredible, I wonder if there is a breakdown for fwd intercepts, midfield and defensive intercepts to see where that is happening. If mainly in defence, while our defence at the minute is incredible injuries to Lever and one of the other pillars put is in some Issues potentially, but with the pressure we apply fwd of defensive 50 it still might not matter.

Well, it would matter because the opposition would probably score more, but with BBB in we should score more too, especially if we maintain that pressure. I wonder whether that's part of the rationale of bringing BBB in....

[Its Time for Another 4,052]

Learnt a lot about how we play from the Tigers v Dogs game last night and particularly what we did that the Dogs didn't. Reinforced a lot of what we had been talking about during the week. 

1. How well we absorbed the intense Tigers pressure. Dogs lost their system under that pressure. 

2. Our ability to get numbers around contests so we weren't isolated. All their numbers seem to be ahead of the ball ready to receive instead of setting up to receive defensively and release to attack. 

3. The maturity to slow down and hit short targets to retain possession. Dogs kept doing play on footy all game and continually played themselves into trouble. They didn't read the state of the game and stop this like we did.

3. Our i50's have improved so much. The Dogs showed how by putting themselves under pressure up the ground their i50's were rushed. Especially final kick i50 which so often ended up handing Tigers uncontested intercepts. 

 

[Its Time for Another 4,052]

The turning point in the game last night appeared to me to be when the Tigers started to get on top in the clearances. Up to that time early into the second quarter the Dogs had been dominating. I don't know how the Tigers turned this around. @binman @AxisofBob et al anyone got any idea what they did. Because whatever it is will be the key to us beating the Dogs. 

This raises a point I've been thinking about for a while. Clearances and particularly Centre Clearances are still a major work in progress. By all rights we should be dominating them with Gawn, Oliver, Viney, Petracca etc but we're not. In 2018 we were the top Centre Clearance team. Goody mentioned it after the Saints game as an area that needs work. 

I have done a bit of a summary of the stats up to the end of round 6 on the differentials on Hitouts and clearances and compared the top teams to the Demons. 

                         Melbourne    Dogs  Tigers  Port

Hitouts            +147              -25       -10      +21

Clearances     +11                +53         4       +23

C Clearances  Equal            +24       +12      Equal

Stoppages       +11               +29        -8        +10

We are clearly not getting the advantage we should from Max's domination. 

 

I also had a look at how individual ruckman are going. Here are the respective stats. The first Melbourne is Max, the next Jacko, Coll Grundy WCE Nic Nat then Vardy.  There's some interesting stats to come out of that lot. The first is the impact Jacko is having on spreading the ruck load. You can't just look at how many hitouts Grundy has won v Gawn. You have to look at how many contests and here you can see that we are able to spread the load a lot more with Jacko compared to how much extra work Grundy has to do. The other is how little game time Nic Nat is playing. Also it shows you how much time Max must be playing out of the ruck as he has 92.5% game time compared to Grundy's 85.1% but has 311 ruck contests to Grundy's 418.  The Hitout win percentage and Hitout to advantage percentage give a more accurate picture of their respective effectiveness. 

More to follow.  

 

Edited May 1, 2021 by It's Time

[Its Time for Another 4,052]

19 hours ago, It's Time said:

The turning point in the game last night appeared to me to be when the Tigers started to get on top in the clearances. Up to that time early into the second quarter the Dogs had been dominating. I don't know how the Tigers turned this around. @binman @AxisofBob et al anyone got any idea what they did. Because whatever it is will be the key to us beating the Dogs. 

This raises a point I've been thinking about for a while. Clearances and particularly Centre Clearances are still a major work in progress. By all rights we should be dominating them with Gawn, Oliver, Viney, Petracca etc but we're not. In 2018 we were the top Centre Clearance team. Goody mentioned it after the Saints game as an area that needs work. 

I have done a bit of a summary of the stats up to the end of round 6 on the differentials on Hitouts and clearances and compared the top teams to the Demons. 

                         Melbourne    Dogs  Tigers  Port

Hitouts            +147              -25       -10      +21

Clearances     +11                +53         4       +23

C Clearances  Equal            +24       +12      Equal

Stoppages       +11               +29        -8        +10

We are clearly not getting the advantage we should from Max's domination. 

 

I also had a look at how individual ruckman are going. Here are the respective stats. The first Melbourne is Max, the next Jacko, Coll Grundy WCE Nic Nat then Vardy.  There's some interesting stats to come out of that lot. The first is the impact Jacko is having on spreading the ruck load. You can't just look at how many hitouts Grundy has won v Gawn. You have to look at how many contests and here you can see that we are able to spread the load a lot more with Jacko compared to how much extra work Grundy has to do. The other is how little game time Nic Nat is playing. Also it shows you how much time Max must be playing out of the ruck as he has 92.5% game time compared to Grundy's 85.1% but has 311 ruck contests to Grundy's 418.  The Hitout win percentage and Hitout to advantage percentage give a more accurate picture of their respective effectiveness. 

More to follow.  

 

Unfortunately the Edit button has disappeared.

The ruck stats are very instructive on how Jacko's going. He's behind Max and Grundy in ruck contests won but right up there with Nic Nat. However, interestingly is a long way off all the other rucks in Hitouts to advantage. So you can see where some work has to be done. But these are incredibly impressive stats for a 19 year old ruckman. And these are compared to the top ruckmen in the comp. 

I did thebinitial post on the run last night and I've realised I left out Eagles stats. They are useful to compare Nic Nat. Here's the list with them added. 

                       Melbourne    Dogs  Tigers  Port       Eagles

Hitouts            +147              -25       -10      +21       +54

Clearances     +11                +53         4       +23         -6

C Clearances  Equal            +24       +12     Equal     +6

Stoppages       +11               +29        -8        +10      -12

Some of these stats make you wonder about the importance of ruckmen. I'm a strong advocated but it does make you wonder. So Demons and Eagles are comfortably the best ruck winning teams. However, Dogs who are the worst at hitouts have the best clearances by a mile. Port appear to be maximising their high ruck wins. I'm guessing the Eagles large difference between centre clearances and stoppages is Nic Nat doing most of the centre bounces and probably not a lot around the ground. 

I suspect the Dogs set up to react to opposition hitouts rather than setup to attack from their own wins. They have massive differentials in both. Although since I set this up they have now lost to Tigers but I haven't checked those clearance stats. 

It is going to make a massive difference if we can start to get the benefit of our ruck dominance. Clearing the ball from centre clearances into our forward line which is now so good at trapping the ball in is going to make us a massively difficult team to play against. 

 

[Cards13 9,117]

On 4/30/2021 at 5:22 PM, Cards13 said:

The intercept stat is incredible, I wonder if there is a breakdown for fwd intercepts, midfield and defensive intercepts to see where that is happening. If mainly in defence, while our defence at the minute is incredible injuries to Lever and one of the other pillars put us in some Issues potentially, but with the pressure we apply fwd of defensive 50 it still might not matter.

Nice way to jinx us guy... 

Going to be real interesting to see how they cover for Tomlinson to keep allowing Lever to sag off. 

[Engorged Onion 9,255]

6 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

Nice way to jinx us guy... 

Going to be real interesting to see how they cover for Tomlinson to keep allowing Lever to sag off. 

Petty is yer man @Cards13

[Cards13 9,117]

13 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Petty is yer man @Cards13

Actually really excited to see him given the big chance to own that role EO, he’s been in the system for a little bit now, has had a couple of tastes and has a similar look to Tomlinson.
 

Let’s give him the time and space to see him grow into it. 

[binman 37,950]

16 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Petty is yer man @Cards13

Yep. 

Coincidentally i just posted in the changes thread that Petty and tommo both trained over preseason as the lockdown full back.

Both started the preseason in the frame for that role.

Tommo won the spot because of a super preseason. And I think petty also had a slight interruption.

As fantastic has tommo has been - and I could not be more impressed - im confident petty will be his equal. He is a serious foorballer.

It is awful to have lost tommo. Particularly for tommo obviously.

But we are incredibly fortunate to have a player to replace him given how important the role is from a structural perspective.