Centre Clearances - Considered Analysis Requested.

[Ted Lasso 19,517]

1 minute ago, Engorged Onion said:

 

I think it's helpful to recognise that even if a ruckman is so so dominant that he can win most taps (though he has to do so under duress and will still mistime/mis direct) it is far easier to to set up around him as the defensive team, than if each tap was a 50/50 role of the dice.

Max's dominance is not advantageous to the team at centre clearances - it is his aerobic ability and marking around the ground that helps.

Max's dominance certainly has the capacity to be significantly advantageous to us at center bounce, but i don't think we're quite getting it rght, i agree it's not the priority it has been in the past, but we really should be breaking even out of there with the players we have in the middle 

[Swooper1987 3,322]

https://www.statsinsider.com.au/blog/afl/understanding-how-clearances-shape-the-results-of-afl-games

This is an interesting empirical perspective, even though it relates more broadly to all clearance rather than centre clearance specifically.  In summary the very best recent teams are only middling at clearance but elite at defending clearance.  It's not so much what you score from the clearances you get, but what the opposition doesn't score against you from the clearances they get.  The very best teams score far more heavily on the intercept - exactly the way we are playing now.

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

2 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

Max's dominance certainly has the capacity to be significantly advantageous to us at center bounce, but i don't think we're quite getting it rght, i agree it's not the priority it has been in the past, but we really should be breaking even out of there with the players we have in the middle 

You're being very diplomatic ?

If it's not a priority, because of what it takes away from the game plan - then irrespective of the calibre of players that we have -breaking even doesn't matter if it gets in the way of the deliberate, methodical strategy that is in place.

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

6 minutes ago, Swooper1987 said:

https://www.statsinsider.com.au/blog/afl/understanding-how-clearances-shape-the-results-of-afl-games

This is an interesting empirical perspective, even though it relates more broadly to all clearance rather than centre clearance specifically.  In summary the very best recent teams are only middling at clearance but elite at defending clearance.  It's not so much what you score from the clearances you get, but what the opposition doesn't score against you from the clearances they get.  The very best teams score far more heavily on the intercept - exactly the way we are playing now.

Absolutely [censored] brilliant @Swooper1987

Can we pin this article to the first page and make it compulsory reading?

Edited May 16, 2021 by Engorged Onion

[leave it to deever 17,511]

Im really thinking we trial Spargo in the middle.

His tackling is awesome. Hes small and will get under packs as well as frees for high tackles.

He works very hard.

His disposal is quick and accurate by hand and foot .

For his size hes a fast runner.

Hes very fit.

Hes tough and brave. Gives his all.

I think he might be a better option than Kozzie.

Harmes was good last week but hes more a tagger and tackler than a ball getter and mover.

Just wondering.

Certainly missing Jv.

[Ted Lasso 19,517]

11 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

You're being very diplomatic ?

If it's not a priority, because of what it takes away from the game plan - then irrespective of the calibre of players that we have -breaking even doesn't matter if it gets in the way of the deliberate, methodical strategy that is in place.

Okay, i should be more clear haha, it's not as much of a priority as it once was imo, we used to bring in extra numbers and really roll the dice, we're not doing that anymore, but all things being equal i'd like to see us reach a point where we're at least breaking even out of there. and when we do that, some of these 4 goal wins like total potentially become 10 goals wins.

In saying that our clearance numbers will simply improve when JV is back in there and in fact we do seem stronger in that area when Luke Jackson is in  there as well. 

No surprise we've had a bad two weeks in that space with Jackson and Viney out of the team

[binman 42,943]

1 hour ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I am concerned how this approach will stand up against a team like the Dogs who likely won't rush and waste the midfield dominance they're likely to get against us, ultimately the goal is to win a premiership and they're the blue print of the team we're likely going to have to beat to do that. 

i'm confident our system can stand up against any other side, but that's the one area i could see the Dogs getting us. 

I get that, and totally agree we don't want to give up a clearance differential to the dogs.

But the clearance differential is fluid in its importance. Against some teams it doesn't matter. And against some teams it does. 

And it is worth remembering in this context we have beaten both last years' grand finalists, so the approach stacks up against good teams.  

Again as Goody noted in his presser he was not overly concerned with the blues winning the clearances because they had an extra and they were just giving it straight back to us.

So Goody didn't make a tactical shift. Because their strategy was hurting them and helping us (eg 15 intercept nearly 40 odd points scored from the back half). 

Goody also noted the game today was one where each team had had different strengths (read different game plans) and their strength is their offensive capacity. He noted we worked to take that away from them and worked to get the game on our terms.

Well, them choosing to put an extra at the stoppage helped us get the game on our terms as it is very defensive, as it prioritizes winning the clearance over having an extra player forward of the contest (which we often have). 

Again, they scored basically nothing from clearances and we scored nearly forty points from intercepts in the back half. So why would Goody respond? 

But he will respond against the dogs.

And he will go into the game with some different tactics.

Because like they have every game, they will look to negate the opposition strengths and take advantage of possible weaknesses, just as he did against the tigers with the higher number of handballs we employed.

So, for example it is very likely we will set up much less aggressively against the dogs at stoppages and have focus on halving more clearances. Because this will negate one of their key strengths. 

Edited May 16, 2021 by binman

[Engorged Onion 10,215]

1 minute ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

Okay, i should be more clear haha, it's not as much of a priority as it once was imo, we used to bring in extra numbers and really roll the dice, we're not doing that anymore, but all things being equal i'd like to see us reach a point where we're at least breaking even out of there. and when we do that, some of these 4 goal wins like total potentially become 10 goals wins.

In saying that our clearance numbers will simply improve when JV is back in there and in fact we do seem stronger in that area when Luke Jackson is in  there as well. 

No surprise we've had a bad two weeks in that space with Jackson and Viney out of the team

Ok - so to confirm - if we break even in clearances - you are suggesting (and the evidence is there) that this equates to a 6 goal better side? 

@Swooper1987 just posted a great link from last year which details why this is not the case.

 

[Ted Lasso 19,517]

2 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Ok - so to confirm - if we break even in clearances - you are suggesting (and the evidence is there) that this equates to a 6 goal better side? 

@Swooper1987 just posted a great link from last year which details why this is not the case.

 

I think the important thing to note from the article is that the very worst side in terms of losing clearance differential is the 2019 tigers who lost by 4.7 clearances per game. so these teams generally are breaking even or getting close to it, rather than winning that stat. we've lost by quite a lot the last two weeks, and i genuinely believe we'd be a better side and won by more today, and last week if by instead of losing clearance by 10 and 12 or whatever it was, we lost it by 4-5. achieving this doesn't mean we have to compromise our defensive strength, but i think it should be an aim of the coaches to tinker with the set up to try and get that number a little bit closer. 

if we lose clearance to the dogs by 10-12 they're a big chance to score 5-6 goals just from that. 

[DeeSpencer 25,701]

We won the centre clearances 12-11 today. A clear bounce back.

Gawn much better. Oliver less flat footed. Harmes not trying as much. Petracca more switched on. And Carlton just aren't Sydney.

Of the ones we lost a lot were free kicks that looked dubious to me. Probably our plan was to lock on. Cripps always gets a free ride and it seems Walsh gets the same whistle.

We lost the around the ground clearances but I think a lot of that was because we dropped a defender off the back all day where as Carlton favour man on man. How many of Carlton's clearance kick landed in the hands of Lever, Petty or Brayshaw?

[binman 42,943]

1 hour ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

we've lost by quite a lot the last two weeks,

We won total clearances last week, meaning we smashed them at stoppages (as we lost the centre square clearances 17-4). 

This week had one more centre square clearances than them. I don't think they scored a single point from centre square clearance and i think we got two goals. Bick tick

They 'won' around the ground stoppages, but as i have pointed out that actually hurt them and helped us. 

The clearance differential  has become a useless stat in of itself, just as hit outs have. It is really only useful in combination with other stats, for example where both team's scoring chains start from and post clearance numbers.

For example, if you just looked at the blues round the ground clearance numbers you might conclude that was a positive outcome for them.

But if you look at that stat in combination with their scores from clearances (which was bugger all) and our score from defensive intercepts and rebounding you get a completely different picture.

And the outcome is a net negative for them. And conversely a net positive for us.   

Edited May 16, 2021 by binman

[Bleed red and blue 59]

Last week we got smashed this week they played the extra number up

Viney is a massive loss for us in the middle just look at what libba does for the doggies same beast just different colours

Just get him right and we'll judge it from there I reckon 

Teams are trying everything ATM to see what will work against us 

Extra number around the ball(blues)

Hold it up once your on the outside (cats,hawks)

Let's see what's next 

[JimmyGadson 3,455]

13 hours ago, binman said:

A look in? What on earth are you talking about? We were always in control of that game and we won by 4 goals easing up.

They had no chance of winning that game once we came with the right level of pressure. 

A look in? Sheesh

And we won't lose the total clearances to the dogs as they won't put an extra at stoppages to give them half a chance to win one

Yeh. A look in. 

We had control over them in most aspects of the game which is obviously why we won and why we've been travelling so well. 

I'm looking at chinks in our armour and if you think that our start and even first half was strong, you're watching something else. 

Before half time, the centre clearance and clearance count was wildly in their favour again and after Goody's presser last week and the talk of us addressing it and starting well in that area, we failed. 

Something isn't working in there and we gave them a great look in going forward from centre bounce on many many occasions. Thankfully we have the best defensive unit in the game, but against the dogs, at the dome, with their ball users through the middle, we will be chopped up and made to pay for being asleep and out positioned at centre bounce. 

That is my point. 

I don't care that you think we're not worried as much about clearance. The coach said last week against Sydney that the clearance stat was concerning and it was concerning for the first half against the Blues on the weekend again. Gawn has had three shockers in a row and his ruck work is just all over the shop at the moment. 

Get this right and we will almost have the complete game.

[Kent 2,909]

13 hours ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I'm with you on the club shifting the importance it places on winning clearances in the sense that we've moved to a quality vs quantity approach, and that's fine, but i think we still have room to be better in that space, because regardless we still have one of the most dominant ruckmen that's played the game, and 2-3 of the very best midfielders in the entire competition, so getting smacked in there isn't ideal, i think we can break even without compromising anything else, and if we do that, we become a much better side again. 

I am concerned how this approach will stand up against a team like the Dogs who likely won't rush and waste the midfield dominance they're likely to get against us, ultimately the goal is to win a premiership and they're the blue print of the team we're likely going to have to beat to do that. 

i'm confident our system can stand up against any other side, but that's the one area i could see the Dogs getting us. 

Tom Liberatore is responsible for 40% of their clearances. Put Viney or others on him and reduce his influence

[binman 42,943]

1 hour ago, JimmyGadson said:

Yeh. A look in. 

We had control over them in most aspects of the game which is obviously why we won and why we've been travelling so well. 

I'm looking at chinks in our armour and if you think that our start and even first half was strong, you're watching something else. 

Before half time, the centre clearance and clearance count was wildly in their favour again and after Goody's presser last week and the talk of us addressing it and starting well in that area, we failed. 

Something isn't working in there and we gave them a great look in going forward from centre bounce on many many occasions. Thankfully we have the best defensive unit in the game, but against the dogs, at the dome, with their ball users through the middle, we will be chopped up and made to pay for being asleep and out positioned at centre bounce. 

That is my point. 

I don't care that you think we're not worried as much about clearance. The coach said last week against Sydney that the clearance stat was concerning and it was concerning for the first half against the Blues on the weekend again. Gawn has had three shockers in a row and his ruck work is just all over the shop at the moment. 

Get this right and we will almost have the complete game.

I reckon we are looking at a different game jimmy. 

There any number of possible examples but here's four quick ones from from this post alone.

One, they never had a look in. There were never in the game. 

Two - and related to the first one, our start and half start were both strong.  In a year where we have won 8 previous games, that was the FIRST TIME this season we were ahead after the first quarter.  For a team that had only lost one last quarter that spelt big trouble for the blues, who are a good team and who brought the heat early. 

And we extended that quarter time lead to be ahead by 13 points at half time.

Perhaps it is a sematic thing, and when you say our start wasn't strong you mean something different to how i would define it.

I would say our starts against the Saints, GWS, Hawks and the Roos were not strong.

By my definition we had a strong start to this game and a strong first half. If anything we didn't have such a strong finish.   

And three, i have no idea what you are referring to when you say:

• we gave great looks in going forward from centre bounce on many many occasions - total and absolute baloney. As Teague noted in his presser they barely had any good looks going inside 50, at all, because of our pressure and the fact we completely smashed them in post clearance pressure 
• Being asleep and out positioned at centre bounce - see above
• Before half time, the centre clearance and clearance count was wildly in their favour? - Really? I actually don't know what the stats were but i assume you do? What were they? We were definitely behind in around the ground stoppages but as Teague noted our pressure meant that were of no value (a point Bartel made in the call during the third quarter and again on RSN this morning). And as Goody noted in his presser it wasn't an issue as they had an extra at the stoppage and they just gave the ball back to us all day.
• And surely we can't have been too far behind in center clearance differential at half time as we won that stat by one. But i don't know the half time number. I assume you do. What was it?

Four, it is complete rubbish, in my opinion, that Gawn has had three shockers in a row and his ruck work is just all over the shop at the moment. 

And on a final point i know you don't rate Goodwin, but do you really think he is going to go into the game against the dogs without making subtle tactical shifts to negate their strengths and disrupt their preferred game style? For example change his stoppage set ups, tag some key mids  etc etc

Edited May 17, 2021 by binman

[defuture15 899]

The poor start against GWS was a worry!

But once again we controlled the game after that. It will be a great test when they play against us at the G.

Greene is good!

[defuture15 899]

I have been listening to Daisy P on SEN.

and she has a really good tactical brain.

We would normally associate fast scoring with success but this is a tactic that will not hold up against strong defences.

Controlling the ball when the ball enters your backline and using it well on the rebound with skill and spread. Tempo and calmness is your successful outcome. Playing your role and selflessness is your mission statement.

The Best game I ever saw was between Geelong and Essendon when salmon kicked 10 and Ablett Snr kicked about 14 goals 6!

We will never see scoring like that again!

[JimmyGadson 3,455]

1 hour ago, binman said:

I reckon we are looking at a different game jimmy. 

There any number of possible examples but here's four quick ones from from this post alone.

One, they never had a look in. There were never in the game. 

Two - and related to the first one, our start and half start were both strong.  In a year where we have won 8 previous games, that was the FIRST TIME this season we were ahead after the first quarter.  For a team that had only lost one last quarter that spelt big trouble for the blues, who are a good team and who brought the heat early. 

And we extended that quarter time lead to be ahead by 13 points at half time.

Perhaps it is a sematic thing, and when you say our start wasn't strong you mean something different to how i would define it.

I would say our starts against the Saints, GWS, Hawks and the Roos were not strong.

By my definition we had a strong start to this game and a strong first half. If anything we didn't have such a strong finish.   

And three, i have no idea what you are referring to when you say:

• we gave great looks in going forward from centre bounce on many many occasions - total and absolute baloney. As Teague noted in his presser they barely had any good looks going inside 50, at all, because of our pressure and the fact we completely smashed them in post clearance pressure 
• Being asleep and out positioned at centre bounce - see above
• Before half time, the centre clearance and clearance count was wildly in their favour? - Really? I actually don't know what the stats were but i assume you do? What were they? We were definitely behind in around the ground stoppages but as Teague noted our pressure meant that were of no value (a point Bartel made in the call during the third quarter and again on RSN this morning). And as Goody noted in his presser it wasn't an issue as they had an extra at the stoppage and they just gave the ball back to us all day.
• And surely we can't have been too far behind in center clearance differential at half time as we won that stat by one. But i don't know the half time number. I assume you do. What was it?

Four, it is complete rubbish, in my opinion, that Gawn has had three shockers in a row and his ruck work is just all over the shop at the moment. 

And on a final point i know you don't rate Goodwin, but do you really think he is going to go into the game against the dogs without making subtle tactical shifts to negate their strengths and disrupt their preferred game style? For example change his stoppage set ups, tag some key mids  etc etc

 

Mate, my definition of 'look-in' in this context was their first half centre clearance dominance. First quarter especially. 

Their ability to take the ball away from centre clearance and enter their 50 gave them a 'look-in'. What is so hard to understand about that? 

I've previously said that we had them covered in all other aspects and thankfully Carlton don't use the ball amazingly well and their forwardline aside from Mackay is hardly a top 10 forward line atm. 

I don't understand what you're rebutting. Our first real clearance came 5 minutes into the game. Go back and watch the first quarter and watch every single one. Even without their spare man from stoppages, they still got on top at centre clearance and there were many occasions I watched on reply when they won clearance at stoppage without that extra man. 

Of course it's not the end of the world and we are strong in other facets so it mattered little in the end, BUT, incase you'd forgotten, all the talk was about us rectifying last week's clearance differential from first bounce and even Tom McDonald stated that we were disappointed with our first half. It's three weeks in a row where we've started poorly from the centre bounce. Last week was a smashing, this week Gawn and co were meant to rectify and it took until the second half to get on top.

So that, my friend, is cause for concern in my eyes for when we come up against better midfields, with better users and more dangerous forwardlines. They will score far easier from easy ball like that. 

I doesn't phase me that you don't share that concern. 

We have a disconnect in there atm and Gawn has been pretty poor in all facets for three weeks. I think most would agree on that, even if you don't. 

 

Edited May 17, 2021 by JimmyGadson

[pineapple dee 2,892]

18 hours ago, Jaded said:

Hibbo is having a great season. Hunt is also playing very well. I’m not that concerned. May can also play small. 

And you haven't mentioned one of our young defenders who's having a great start to his career and is almost as significant a contributor as any of our defenders, Trent Rivers. A star in the making.

[Tony Tea 2,809]

Could there be another dynamic to our clearances? Previously we have barrelled in, won clearances, banged the ball forward, and been picked off across halfback. Now we seem to be sitting back and allowing the opposition to have first use, then picking them off across halfback. I think we would concede that to be a foolish tactic against the best sides - four of whom we will soon play: WB, WC, BL, PAP. Maybe it's something to do with missing Viney. It's also highly unlikely the coaching panel is unaware of the discrepancy. But what if next week we had seemingly swallowed a magic pill and our clearance work was perfect? Would it still be perfect in September? Remember the 2018 Prelim? We went into that game confident our onballers had their onballers covered, but we were ambushed and their onballers creamed us. My point is this: are Goodwin, Yze and Williams keeping our powder dry? Could our footy brains be working towards us ambushing the opposition in finals? (IF you are a footy journo trolling for copy, you never read that.)

[Swooper1987 3,322]

4 hours ago, JimmyGadson said:

 

We have a disconnect in there atm and Gawn has been pretty poor in all facets for three weeks. I think most would agree on that, even if you don't. 

 

Yeah, I'm not so sure about this.  When you say all facets, what are you referring too? Tap work, marking, possessions, positioning around the ground, work rate?  He was actually very good in the second half yesterday, in fact from quarter time he very easily outpointed his direct opponent.  Pittonet got 3 possessions after quarter time.  Gawn absolutely dominated him.  The fact that Carlton spent most of the day kicking it away from Max, yet still managed to find him on occasion was of particular note.  He had 8 score involvements and 16 hit outs to advantage from 44 in total.  He is judged very harshly at times.  I'd say he broke even with Goldstein (no shame in that) and was perhaps marginally bested by Hickey despite having identical possession tallies and many more hitouts (44-16).  Hickey had more clearances and marks and kicked a goal, but Max was instrumental in us holding on in the last quarter of that game. Hickey took care of Grundy pretty comfortably on the weekend.  He's a decent player.  Was Max as dominant as between rounds 2 and 6 - absolutely not, but then neither has Petracca been.  I'm sure he'd like to be having things a little more his own way, but that's what happens when you're a champion. Someone is always coming after you.

[DeeSpencer 25,701]

37 minutes ago, Tony Tea said:

Could there be another dynamic to our clearances? Previously we have barrelled in, won clearances, banged the ball forward, and been picked off across halfback. Now we seem to be sitting back and allowing the opposition to have first use, then picking them off across halfback. I think we would concede that to be a foolish tactic against the best sides - four of whom we will soon play: WB, WC, BL, PAP. Maybe it's something to do with missing Viney. It's also highly unlikely the coaching panel is unaware of the discrepancy. But what if next week we had seemingly swallowed a magic pill and our clearance work was perfect? Would it still be perfect in September? Remember the 2018 Prelim? We went into that game confident our onballers had their onballers covered, but we were ambushed and their onballers creamed us. My point is this: are Goodwin, Yze and Williams keeping our powder dry? Could our footy brains be working towards us ambushing the opposition in finals? (IF you are a footy journo trolling for copy, you never read that.)

I don’t think we’re playing possum as such TT.

But I definitely think the focus has shifted to stopping the opposition winning the ball cleanly rather than win at all cost ourselves.

Thats a model that’s worked for Richmond for 4 years now. Though they certainly step it up for September.

If there’s one player that’s potentially holding back a little I think it’s Gawn. He’s never jumped much in the ruck and Hickey’s often troubled him with his reach and craft. He has been adapting to Jackson taking time too. I wasn’t surprised he bounced back a bit with the main share of the job again. I’m hoping the big guy has some cards up his sleeve. 

[DEE fence 5,014]

On 5/16/2021 at 12:22 PM, Swooper1987 said:

https://www.statsinsider.com.au/blog/afl/understanding-how-clearances-shape-the-results-of-afl-games

This is an interesting empirical perspective, even though it relates more broadly to all clearance rather than centre clearance specifically.  In summary the very best recent teams are only middling at clearance but elite at defending clearance.  It's not so much what you score from the clearances you get, but what the opposition doesn't score against you from the clearances they get.  The very best teams score far more heavily on the intercept - exactly the way we are playing now.

You are right, counter punching is a thing, while it is fundamentally different sport, it doesn't escape my attention that the most transformative thing for Liverpool in their drought breaking, title season, was Virgil van Dijk and counterattacking on the turnover. Too many parallels to ignore I reckon, with our defensive game. Hopefully as successful as well. Not lost how fit Liverpool were, as well as buying into the defensive role playing of players, who have/had a history of being prima donnas..

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Getting better at centre clearances effectively won us the flag.

Bang!

Bang, Bang, Bang!

[leave it to deever 17,511]

All fixed.