Daniel Jackson threads [Merged] | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Daniel Jackson threads [Merged]

Re: Daniel Jackson

rosy23 said:
Haha I meant your post.
Click to expand...

In one sense someone did hack my account last night Rosy. Some sober guy. I wont be bearing that kind of football from the tigers without self medicating again. Its just too hard. Expect the acute optimist, drunk TGW back next week.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

Our best player last night. One of the few that actual stood up.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

The more possessions Jackson gets and the more 'involved' he is in the game the worse he plays...the more he costs us
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

I just wish he knew his limitations. He thinks he can kick, he thinks he can shrug off tackles, he thinks he can take a mark. No he can't do any of these things well - he is good at getting in and under, he is okay at tackling and he is good at tagging players, these are his real value to the team. He needs to handball to better finishers (I know, that's another story) and that is it. No more, no less and then he will be the best player that he can be, not a star but a good workmanlike player.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

And he's averaging almost 5 marks a game. He probably thinks correctly.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

Jukes Extended said:
Dumb footballer and that's proven by the fact he's 2nd at the club for clangers.
Click to expand...


Jacko 3.1 Cotch 2.9. averages. Not a lot of difference I suppose that criteria for proven dumbness suggests Cotch is lacking in that category too. :hihi
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

rosy23 said:
Jacko 3.1 Cotch 2.9. averages. Not a lot of difference I suppose that criteria for proven dumbness suggests Cotch is lacking in that category too. :hihi
Click to expand...

So Jackson averages more clangers from a lot less possessions.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

rosy23 said:
Jacko 3.1 Cotch 2.9. averages. Not a lot of difference I suppose that criteria for proven dumbness suggests Cotch is lacking in that category too. :hihi
Click to expand...


Cotch wins a heap more contested possessions, if Jacko averaged the same it would be at 4.5 at least :hihi
Plus Cotchin has had 28 more possessions in total.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

Keep moving the goal posts Jukes. It was a silly comment to suggest numbers of clangers equates to dumbness. Cotch only averages 4 more contested possessions a game than Jacko as well.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

clubs are happy to let jacko and grigg get as much of the ball as they want,.,they are never tagged or manned up on..they just run around getting possesion and thats fine because they do next to no damage with their disposal..clubs know if they work on lids and cotch then they basically have our run and damage nullified..jacko does some good stuff but he is one of around 8 players out there last night we desperatley need to move on or only keep as a back up player to replace injured guns...time to wake up to this richmond
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

rosy23 said:
Keep moving the goal posts Jukes. It was a silly comment to suggest numbers of clangers equates to dumbness. Cotch only averages 4 more contested possessions a game than Jacko as well.
Click to expand...

Clangers are any blatant disposal turnover, any free kick conceded, dropped marks or fumbles under no pressure, 50m penalties conceded.
I consider any of these dumb.

4 more contested a game is a lot.....that's half of what Jackson averages anyway.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

arlobill said:
jacko does some good stuff but he is one of around 8 players out there last night we desperatley need to move on or only keep as a back up player to replace injured guns...time to wake up to this richmond
Click to expand...

Yep that's being said about Jacko and Newmo and they won't play in a premiership blah blah blah. Fact is they aren't our "guns" as you put it. They are our workhorses rather than marquee players but they put their hands up and gave it their all last night. There could also be questions asked about the guns who didn't go above the call of duty in such a big game. Are they made of the right stuff to lead us to a premiership? If so why didn't they do more last night?

If anyone goes to the B&F night I'd be really interested to know how the panel votes in regards to last night's game.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

rosy23 said:
And he's averaging almost 5 marks a game. He probably thinks correctly.
Click to expand...
themarks he takes are chipped ten meters backwards... Stats are useless when describing how much this guy costs us
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

Streak said:
That is a fair bit though Rosy.
Click to expand...

Maybe, and I'd expect that, but my post was in response to certain claims Jukes was making about proof of player dumbness. People say Trent's disposal effectiveness is low because he has mostly contested possessions. Dan has higher disposal effectiveness per game than Trent and they have similar clangers per game. My point isn't to compare the players. It's more to compare how the whipping boys are whipped and the favoured players slip through to the keeper.

Jacko should be one of the last players being bagged for last night's effort yet he's top of the tree.
 
Re: Daniel Jackson

Normally only lurk but here are facts about Dan's game
Against Essendon for Richmond Dan Jackson was

#1 in possessions

#1 in clearances

#1 in contested possessions

#1 in tackles

# No frees against

# 1 in handballs

# 2 in I50's

# 3 in kicks

# 4 in contested marks

# 6 in marks

# DE of 72% better than more than half the team and most of our so called skilled players

# 1 in DT

# 3 in Supercoach

# 2 Clangers only

Now the simple question is what game were the posters above watching. As he was one of the few who ran and spread plus won it in close.

If Cotchin or Deledio or Martin had those same figures it would universely applauded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
< Collingwood, Geelong, North | PREinvention >
Top Bottom