Jump to content

Featured Replies

19 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

There is a significant amount of talk in here about bias and conspiracies and favourability etc.

I'd be really interested in as deep an analysis of free kick counts as possible. Why do the Dogs and Eagles, for example, get so many more than their opponents, and why does Richmond concede so many?

The two main times a free kick is awarded are tackles and marking contests. As to tackles, most free kicks go to the player with the ball (holding the man, push in the back, high contact, tripping, dangerous tackle) as the tackler only has one option (holding the ball). Similarly in a marking contest we know that the player in front is going to get free kicks for holds, pushes in the back or high contact a lot more than the player behind.

Is it really that fanciful to wonder whether the Dogs get more free kicks because, for example, they're first to the ball more often than their opponent, and therefore get more free kicks from bad tackles? Or that their key position players hold front position more often and therefore get free kicks more than other clubs?

Similarly with Richmond they've regularly played with aggression in their era of dominance and have pushed the envelope, giving away professional free kicks where needed as well. Is it that surprising then that they concede more frees than they get?

I have no data on any of this but it's a topic that is missing from this thread, which focuses solely on incompetence, bias and corruption.

Is there a statistics page of frees?

ie A breakdown of what the frees were for?

That would be the frst step in analysing it...

 
21 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

There is a significant amount of talk in here about bias and conspiracies and favourability etc.

I'd be really interested in as deep an analysis of free kick counts as possible. Why do the Dogs and Eagles, for example, get so many more than their opponents, and why does Richmond concede so many?

The two main times a free kick is awarded are tackles and marking contests. As to tackles, most free kicks go to the player with the ball (holding the man, push in the back, high contact, tripping, dangerous tackle) as the tackler only has one option (holding the ball). Similarly in a marking contest we know that the player in front is going to get free kicks for holds, pushes in the back or high contact a lot more than the player behind.

Is it really that fanciful to wonder whether the Dogs get more free kicks because, for example, they're first to the ball more often than their opponent, and therefore get more free kicks from bad tackles? Or that their key position players hold front position more often and therefore get free kicks more than other clubs?

Similarly with Richmond they've regularly played with aggression in their era of dominance and have pushed the envelope, giving away professional free kicks where needed as well. Is it that surprising then that they concede more frees than they get?

I have no data on any of this but it's a topic that is missing from this thread, which focuses solely on incompetence, bias and corruption.

I think the fallacy in the reasoning above about the Bulldogs is apparent when the number of possessions is taken into account.

The Bulldogs often have a large differential greatly in their favour, even when the opposition has more possessions.So the man with the ball in the opposition is being penalised. They must be far better tacklers than any other side.

 

23 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

There is a significant amount of talk in here about bias and conspiracies and favourability etc.

I'd be really interested in as deep an analysis of free kick counts as possible. Why do the Dogs and Eagles, for example, get so many more than their opponents, and why does Richmond concede so many?

The two main times a free kick is awarded are tackles and marking contests. As to tackles, most free kicks go to the player with the ball (holding the man, push in the back, high contact, tripping, dangerous tackle) as the tackler only has one option (holding the ball). Similarly in a marking contest we know that the player in front is going to get free kicks for holds, pushes in the back or high contact a lot more than the player behind.

Is it really that fanciful to wonder whether the Dogs get more free kicks because, for example, they're first to the ball more often than their opponent, and therefore get more free kicks from bad tackles? Or that their key position players hold front position more often and therefore get free kicks more than other clubs?

Similarly with Richmond they've regularly played with aggression in their era of dominance and have pushed the envelope, giving away professional free kicks where needed as well. Is it that surprising then that they concede more frees than they get?

I have no data on any of this but it's a topic that is missing from this thread, which focuses solely on incompetence, bias and corruption.

I have been wondering if there is any detailed data on frees, not just across the whole of the competition. I would like to see where/what we win frees for and where/what we give them away for compared to the rest of the teams. I am sure that someone is doing this and that clubs have access to it. I think it would be valuable knowledge to have on a week to week basis so that you know how to counter opposition teams.

Any one know where this data might be?

 

While we're in the hunt for free kick data, I'd be fascinated to see a timeline of them over the course of games.

I'm absolutely sure that much of the differential in our game against West Coast game in a couple of bursts, most notably the alarming one right after the restart.

Would be interesting to see the extent of a relationship between free kick 'momentum' and overall game momentum. Before? After? Side by side?


1 hour ago, Demonland said:

It was the free kick differential after Round 2 which was the first round of the season that Zero Hanger release their Free Kick Differential graphic.

I'm not sure why it disappeared but here it is again.

166542405_1867660023408217_2670941786786

I can’t see the relevance of this “ one-off” stat from round  2. .Is it trying to show the Dogs DONT get a dream run?

Edited by Jumping Jack Clennett
Typo

  • Author
2 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

I can’t see the relevance of this “ one-off” stat from round  2. .Is it trying to show the Dogs DONT get a dream run?

They probably complained to the AFL.

Rd 1 vs Collingwood + 4

Rd 2 vs WCE in Melbourne -5

Rd 3 vs Kangaroos + 9

Rd 4 vs Brisbane + 14

Rd 5 vs Suns + 1

Rd 6 vs GWS + 1

Rd 7 vs Richmond - 4

Rd 8 vs Carlton + 3

Rd 9 vs Port - 2

Rd 10 vs St. Kilda + 10

Rd 11 vs Melbourne + 1

Rd 12 vs Freo  = 0

Rd 13 Bye

Rd 14 vs Geelong + 8

Rd 15 vs WCE + 7

Rd 16 vs Kangaroos + 7

Rd 17 vs Sydney + 13

Rd 18 vs Suns - 1

Rd 19 vs Melbourne + 14

Rd 20 vs Adelaide = 0

Rd 21 vs Essendon  + 3

2 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

While we're in the hunt for free kick data, I'd be fascinated to see a timeline of them over the course of games.

I'm absolutely sure that much of the differential in our game against West Coast game in a couple of bursts, most notably the alarming one right after the restart.

Would be interesting to see the extent of a relationship between free kick 'momentum' and overall game momentum. Before? After? Side by side?

The location too, free kicks inside the oppo forward 50 are the killers.

 
2 hours ago, Demonland said:

It was the free kick differential after Round 2 which was the first round of the season that Zero Hanger release their Free Kick Differential graphic.

I'm not sure why it disappeared but here it is again.

166542405_1867660023408217_2670941786786

Pretty sure the graphic I saw had doggies at +86.

Too much red wine?


7 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Is there a statistics page of frees?

ie A breakdown of what the frees were for?

That would be the frst step in analysing it...

Yep, agree. I'm sure this data exists, but I've never seen it made available publicly.

Separate to any discussion about bias/the Bulldogs, I'd be keen to know what sorts of errors we are making more often than other clubs. 

4 hours ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

I think the fallacy in the reasoning above about the Bulldogs is apparent when the number of possessions is taken into account.

The Bulldogs often have a large differential greatly in their favour, even when the opposition has more possessions.So the man with the ball in the opposition is being penalised. They must be far better tacklers than any other side.

That's my point: they may well be, and if they are, it stands to reason they'd get more free kicks.

Tackling properly is a skill, like kicking and marking. It isn't silly at all to suggest one side might do it better than another, and that should be borne out in a higher free kick count.

Tonight's game is a great example of what I was saying above.

Richmond are -4 in free kicks tonight. They've given away a stack of off the ball, or late hit, or undisciplined, free kicks tonight.

It's not a conspiracy or anti-Richmond bias, it's just a side which infringes on the rules a lot.

  • 2 weeks later...

So four teams in the 8 are very positive (+146) and four are somewhat negative (-45).

Two teams in the top 4 are positive (+45) and two are negative (-22).

Significance?


I ran this through the old stats calculator. Mean -0.11, standard deviation 31.7. All numbers comfortably within 3 standard deviations. Chance of 72 or more: 1%. Change of -86 or lower: 1%. So outliers, but (unfortunately) nothing extraordinary.

I also ran it through the old conspiracy calculator and it ranked the Dogs as "teachers pets". So again no raised eyebrows.

I also ran it through the old mongrel calculator and it confirmed that Richmond are in fact mongrels. So that makes it official.

Edited by Mazer Rackham

3 hours ago, Demonstone said:

It's less than one kick per game.  Nothing to get upset about, folks.

Agreed, and how many individual acts influence a game of footy?

Kicks,  handballs,  marks,  contested marks (forward line?) punching clear,  spoils,  spoils to create a boundary throw in,  tap outs,  tap outs to advantage,  positioning of the onballers at stoppages & centre bounce downs,  tagging,  knock-ons,  individuals running to flood,  formation needs,  bumps,  running to create midfield stoppages,  running to press forward,  2-way running,  double teaming,  blocking,  pressure acts,  1%ers,  shepherding,  shots at goal etc etc etc

However, actual talent levels are needed with all those examples.  Fitness, selfless acts and teamwork are huge factors as well

So the footy acts number in the thousands.  That's where games of footy are won & lost

And without a great degree of talent along with top level coaching, a team can't hope to win big anyway

Edited by Macca


On 8/12/2021 at 6:13 PM, Little Goffy said:

While we're in the hunt for free kick data, I'd be fascinated to see a timeline of them over the course of games.

I'm absolutely sure that much of the differential in our game against West Coast game in a couple of bursts, most notably the alarming one right after the restart.

Would be interesting to see the extent of a relationship between free kick 'momentum' and overall game momentum. Before? After? Side by side?

Clearly demonstrated in the cats second qrt onslaught imho.

Ya, how many are “let go”

Selwoods throws and insufficient intent

Dangerfield’s 25 m runs

Hawkins “dump” tackles - two weeks in a row

 

 

Last 10 finals Dogs have won the free kick count. Just sayin....

On 8/12/2021 at 1:31 PM, Boots and all said:

The location too, free kicks inside the oppo forward 50 are the killers.

Will be interesting to watch these passages of play once the ProVision is online:

 

D3C77A6E-615E-4A8E-A8E4-C668B36B40E2.thumb.jpeg.db6f9613acbfaf4e2d776f6a723e9742.jpeg

Dogs back to dominating the free kick count, 22 to 14 today. 
 


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Haha
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Clap
      • Like
    • 171 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Sad
    • 46 replies
  • POSTGAME: St. Kilda

    After kicking the first goal of the match the Demons were always playing catch up against the Saints in Alice Spring and could never make the most of their inside 50 entries to wrestle back the lead.

      • Clap
      • Like
    • 328 replies
  • VOTES: St. Kilda

    Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award as Christian Petracca, Jake Bowey, Clayton Oliver & Kozzy Pickett round out the Top 5. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1

      • Like
    • 31 replies