Positives - ch.3 | 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.

Positives - ch.3

pahoffm

pahoffm

No one player is bigger than the club.
Mar 24, 2004
21,145
4
Just seen the stats from the Weagles game on Prowess.
I didn't get to see the game last weekend, but these stats do show up some positives.

West CoastStatisticRichmond
408Disposals305
238Kicks174
79Long Kicks69
33.2% Kicks Long39.7
170Handballs131
1.4Kick to Handball Ratio1.3
130Marks95
17Contested Marks6
13.1% Marks Contested6.3
73Tackles76
20Goals14
11Behinds5
31.0Scoring Shots19.0
64.5Conversion73.7
20.4Disposals Per Goal21.8
13.2Disposals Per Scoring Shot16.1
19Frees For13
13Frees Against19
28Hitouts22
31First Possessions32
32Clearances26
47Inside 50s40
2.4Inside 50s Per Goal2.9
1.5Inside 50s Per Scoring Shot2.1
32Rebound 50s30
35Contested Possessions35
373Uncontested Possessions277
8.6% Possessions Contested11.2
611%ers67
54Errors50
13.2% Disposal Errors16.4
25Bounces28

The highlighted stats show that the boys:
1. Kicked longer.
2. Put as much pressure on them as they put on us.
3. Were more direct, and consequently,
4. The conversion rate improved.
5. 1st possies matched Weagles.
6. Improved the hard stuff.
7. Were prepared to back themselves by running and bouncing alot more.

Maybe it was the effect of playing on a bigger ground.
For those of you who saw the game, were these noticeable differences?

Tonight I'll compare round 3 with rounds 1 & 2, to gauge any improvement, and see how we compare to Briisie whom the boys play this weekend coming.

Hell's bells! Bloody formatting.  >:(
 
What distance constitutes a long kick?

In todays game, kicking long more often than not means kicking to a contest, and so I don't see how this stat is good. When we kick longer against the good sides, and we don't get clean possesion, we get killed on the rebound.

The good sides like the Eagles, like to go shorter and maintain clean possesion.

We also got punished on our basic short turnovers by both hand and foot.

There were parts of this game where we improved, but overall the game verses the Saints was far more consistant.
 
Good one Phantom, I've enjoyed these statistical analysis' you've been doing.

What would be really interesting to me would be to see them broken into each half (not suggesting you do that or that it's possible however) - I suspect they'd really tell a tale then.

The Eagles went short to little effect in the first half, we made them. When they went longer and more direct (basically by shrugging off our midfield) they really started to score heavily. I suspect most of our more flattering stats came in the first half when we really should have led going into half-time.

GR said:
What distance constitutes a long kick?

In todays game, kicking long more often than not means kicking to a contest, and so I don't see how this stat is good. When we kick longer against the good sides, and we don't get clean possesion, we get killed on the rebound.

The good sides like the Eagles, like to go shorter and maintain clean possesion.

We also got punished on our basic short turnovers by both hand and foot.

There were parts of this game where we improved, but overall the game verses the Saints was far more consistant.
Click to expand...

I agree we were more consistent against the Saints GR. I think our long kicking was pretty good last week - most of Richo's 10 or so chances were from long direct kicks into space. As I said to Phantom, the Eagles short game didn't really work for them in the first half - as I recall they had 90 more possessions going into half-time. When they went longer through the corridor and carried the ball more decisively they started to get on top IMO.

With a half by half analysis, I suspect we'd see that each side had a majority of their long kicks and bounces in opposite halves of the game...with the scoreboard clearly reflecting the difference.
 
Wiggles Richmond
373 Uncontested Possessions 277

A considerable amount of uncontested possies don't you think? I wonder how many of the Eagles UP where kicked from our boys straight down an Eagles throat.

Can anyone watch the game & count them? ;D
 
Simmo and Ranies continue to be the positives for me as they continue there good form.

Sampi did get free at times but the drive that Raines has given us is one of the few areas of the modern game that we look to have a long term solution for, the skillfull, creative small backman that breaks the lines.

Simmo contiunes to give a honest contest at the bounces and be a running link man.

Also thought Tambling went better and showed some nice things. Unlike last year when he gets on the lead he is taking the marks out in front of his face and not dropping them. Warrants more game time on that effort.

Overall the fact that we could go with one of the elite teams for a half and put together some nice passages of play was pleasing.

Just the same old faces making the same old mistakes let us down in the second half but from TW's comment's in the press he knows who they are.
 
Haven't formatted this yet.
I'll do it after dinner.

Tigers Opposition
1 2 3 Rnd by Rnd 1 2 3
323 326 305 Disposals 351 303 408
182 193 174 Kicks 233 205 238
32 71 69 Long Kicks 59 82 79
17.6 36.8 39.7 % Kicks Long 25.3 40 33.2
141 133 131 Handballs 118 98 170
1.3 1.5 1.3 Kick to Handball Ratio 2 2.1 1.4
110 104 95 Marks 131 102 130
8 8 6 Contested Marks 5 7 17
7.3 7.7 6.3 % Marks Contested 3.8 6.9 13.1
43 76 76 Tackles 45 74 73
7 11 14 Goals 25 13 20
7 11 5 Behinds 14 8 11
14 22 19 Scoring Shots 39 21 31
50 50 73.7 Conversion 64.1 61.9 64.5
46.1 29.6 21.8 Disposals Per Goal 14 23.3 20.4
23.1 14.8 16.1 Disposals Per Scoring Shot 9 14.4 13.2
16 17 13 Frees For 22 15 19
22 15 19 Frees Against 15 17 13
27 30 22 Hitouts 19 21 28
23 31 32 First Possessions 38 30 31
19 26 26 Clearances 37 29 32
42 46 40 Inside 50s 65 63 47
6 4.2 2.9 Inside 50s Per Goal 2.6 4.8 2.4
3 2.1 2.1 Inside 50s Per Scoring Shot 1.7 3 1.5
42 49 30 Rebound 50s 38 35 32
19 27 35 Contested Possessions 23 29 35
305 306 277 Uncontested Possessions 323 285 373
5.9 8.1 11.2 % Possessions Contested 6.6 9.2 8.6
49 75 67 1%ers 46 68 61
65 43 50 Errors 55 49 54
20.1 13.2 16.4 % Disposal Errors 15.7 16.2 13.2
16 19 28 Bounces 42 45 25
I've worked out the shortcut.
You add all the fomatting code in on an excell spreadsheet, so you only have to drag down the trs and tds.  ;)
 
Just finishing dinner now.
It will be formatted shortly.
How are you going to have enough patience for the Tiges to come good, if you can't wait for me to format a table. ;)
 
i enjoy the stats table too phantom, but there is one thing the stats don't show... that tivendale is a dud :hihi
 
Travelling Tiger said:
I agree, there should be a "Tivenclangers" row in the stats.
Click to expand...

I can do that now that I'm a master at speed table formatting. I'll do it for all the players.

Time me from now.
 
Time out.
My wife demands I take the dog for a walk.
Gee sons are useless.
 
Phantom said:
I've worked out the shortcut.
You add all the fomatting code in on an excell spreadsheet, so you only have to drag down the trs and tds. ;)
Click to expand...

Brilliant.

Seperate cells (filled down) for the code which then appears as adjacent text when refomatted for posting.
 
love ya stats Phantom, keep them coming. what website do you get them from ?

Ian, while I am not Tivendales biggest fan and have been extremely disappointed with his past performances over the years, Richmond really needs Tivendale to play and to give him the ball.

Yeah, I know he has basically sucked over the past 2 years, but when Richmond did well against the Saints and in the first quarter against the eagles, Tivers has running the ball in the Richmond forward line and making the plays.

Since they kept him, I truely hope someone at the club works on the skill level and he sheds a few kilos. He doesnt have the pace he used to.
 
Tiver is going OK at the moment. Shaded Dal Santo a couple of weeks ago and was far from our worst last week.

Great work Phantom on the stats breaks down the game into clearly defined areas that help us understand what we need to do just to be competitive.

At a glance too many disposal errors and we are giving up far too much uncontested footy. ALso getting smashed at the clearnaces. We go better when we kick longer and have more tackles then the other mob.

Lots of stugf to pick out there but great formatting. :clap :clap
 
There you go, how many minutes was that?
From the time I clocked back on it must have been 10 minutes to:
1. create new database in access.
2. Get external spreadsheet
3. Run a query
4. Export the query back into excel
5. Reformat the excel spreadsheet, including web table formats
6. Copy paste onto a web reply
15 minutes at max.
I'm a star, I'm a star, I'm a star. (Imagine me dressed as Gene Kelly.  ;) )


Player Ave Err's
M.Richardson 7.0
J.Humm 4.0
R.Hall 4.0
N.Brown 4.0
K.Pettifer 4.0
T.Simmonds 3.0
P.Bowden 3.0
G.Tivendale 3.0
A.Raines 2.7
B.Deledio 2.3
C.Hyde 2.3
A.Krakouer 2.0
B.Hartigan 2.0
J.Schulz 2.0
N.Foley 2.0
S.Tuck 2.0
J.Bowden 2.0
A.Kellaway 1.7
D.Gaspar 1.7
C.Newman 1.7
M.Coughlan 1.3
W.Thursfield 1.0
K.Johnson 1.0
D.Rodan 1.0
D.Jackson 1.0
A.Pattison 1.0
R.Tambling 0.5
T.Roach 0.0

From now on in the IT world, this will become known as the "Phantom" method of website table formatting. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
< Browny - what to do? / TW right [Merged] | Richo to CHB? >
Top Bottom