GoodOne said:
Sure, not every centre bounce is clearly won by one team over another
Then how does the ball get out of there? If a clearance is not won because the ball gets locked in then another ballup results.
GoodOne said:
That was very clumsy by Hall. He didnt even need to get his arm in, Cooney was clearly rapped up by another Tiger. A perfect example of
the frustration of watching Hall play.
Players are instructed to gang tackle where possible, whether the player is wrapped up or not. And as I said, there were a dozen other examples not paid on that day, and a dozen more from most other games. I saw five in ten minutes watching the match tonight.
GoodOne said:
As for top 50 clangers list, forget the top 50 clangers list, look at percentage of clangers for each possession. The best players obviously more often have more clangers per game, but its how often you make a mistake per possession that really shows out Hall.
[sigh] Go, you again make the assumption that 'clangers' are all disposal errors when you should and probably do know full well by now they are not. If Hall's opponent almost marks 60m out yet that mark turns out put down on the stat sheet as a 'clanger' against Hall because he gave away a free kick when a mark would otherwise have been taken anyway, then it hasn't hurt us one iota in the scheme of things (if anything it allows time to flood back) and it has
bugger all to do with disposals.
If a defender has nine disposals for the game and gives away three free kicks (marked down as 'clangers' or 'errors') which would have been marks anyway if not for the infringement, do they therefore have a
disposal error percentage of 33%? Of course not, and you are misinterpreting the stats to represent it that way.
1/6th of Hall's entire 'clangers' from his career are free kicks against him during 2001/2 when he was an apprentice ruckman. 1/3rd of his total 'clangers' are free kicks against - a good percentage of them no doubt occasions where his opponent would have marked anyway. Whatever the hell that has to do disposal errors in defense I'm darned if I know, but it suits you to include them and misrepresent them as 'disposal errors' apparently.
Players that frequently put a receiver under pressure with a half volley to pick up, or a contested marking situation, do not have 'clanger' marked against that disposal if our player merely touches it first. Players that make patently stupid decisions which turn the ball over do not have 'clanger' marked against their name if a teammate touches it first.
As I've said, it's a largely meaningless stat - especially when someone interprets it to be exclusively made up of disposal errors.
Players in midfield pick up easy disposals all day long which lowers their potential error rate dramatically, handballing 2-5 metres to a player in the clear, kicking to unmarked opponents, getting the ball back again for another easy disposal etc. On top of that, a 'clearance' to space is ot counted as a 'clanger', regardless if it ends up being a turnover or not.
As for the forwards, I expect most of them in the list would have similar ratio's to Hall.
Players who are not 'go to' defenders or are attackers get nowhere near the same opportunity to pick up easy possessions which lower the 'clanger' to disposal ratio.
GoodOne said:
These are his errors per possession stats over his career:
2006 30%
2005 15.76%
2004 25.2%
2003 24.27
2002 41.6%
2001 57.7%
Career average if 31%
Dramatically inflated by his years as an apprentice ruckman - there, like defense, he can infringe in the ruck and have 'clanger' marked against his name without even touching the ball, let alone disposing of it - and naturally, you aren't going to include his hitouts as lowering the disposal ratio...it's nice, a ruckman is in a 1on1 contest much of the game where he can pick up a 'clanger', yet winning that contest with a hitout does not lower your precious 'clanger to disposals' ratio.
Nor is there any offset to the 'clanger' stat by the fact a player wins a free kick - if Hall has had only 40 free's against errors more than his free's for, then that fact doesn't wipe 60 'clangers' off his tally does it?
It's very fair and balanced huh? A real meaningful stat. :
Hall's 'error' ratio has headed in the right direction as a defender until this year when he's played the bulk of his games not match fit or under injury cloud.
Again, misrepresentation of bald stats don't show these factors - informed interpretation does.
GoodOne said:
Both totally unacceptable at AFL level. Basically every third possession has been an error.
Like Hall, over a third of Croad's 'clangers' have been free kicks against, which is the same reason Richo rates so high (along with his kicking for goal). You like to harp on so much about 'clangers', then you should at least learn (or honestly recognise) how they're compiled don't you think?
Brettstigers said:
My concern is that other than the game last year against Hawthorn I really can't remember Hall in any role other than as a defender. As pointed out he is a spare parts tall - that is his role and if he is to have longevity in his career he is going to need to learn (and quickly) how to be that defender - if that is what we need. Regardless of Hall's attitude it is my opinion that RFC team will have turned a corner in both ability and depth when Hall isn't in it.
Early in his career he had a successful foray forward every opportunity he had Brett, as I've posted before on numerous occasions. Hall knows how to defend just fine, but he's far more suited to CHB where he gets a chance to gather speed and momentum to spoil, than to FB on a sit and sprint leading forward who has tons of space to work in because we keep turning the ball over and our midfield is getting hammered.
