What Hawthorn does different to us. | 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.

What Hawthorn does different to us.

B

Bill James

Guest
Ultimately the main reaons is Hawthorn kick more goals than their direct opponents more often. However there are a couple of stats that are symptomatic of why.

CONTESTED POSESSIONS
Hawthorn ranks 18th for CP differential vs their direct opponent. On average they have 15 less CP's than their opponents.
On our side Hardwick is obsessed with winning the CP count.

ONE PERCENTERS (spoils, smothers, shepherds and knock-ons)
Hawthorn ranks 1st for 1%er differential vs their direct opponent. They average 11 more 1%ers than their opponent.
Richmond ranks 18th for 1%er differential vs direct opponents. We average 7 fewer 1%ers than our opponent.

Personally I think these stats are related. You can choose to take a contested ball which might work but probably results in a stoppage or worse a free against, or you can choose to knock on and keep the team moving. Clearly Hawthorn is more willing to knock the ball onto advantage than take a dodgy contested possession.

There is a difference between winning a contest (good) and creating contests (bad). Surely it is obvious that hitting someone on his own inside 50 is a better avenue to goal than kicking to a contest.
 

tigertim

something funny is written here
Mar 6, 2004
29,891
12,161
They gave a plan that works ...I'm joking! Relax. ;D
 
I'd put it slightly differently.

If your chap wins the contest he usually gets a predicable and scrappy kick or handball out. About as useful as winning ruck taps are.

The key with the Hawks is a good zone and pressure to grab that loose ball, or pressured kick, and have easier but precise transition ball on the outside.

Basically a game based on turnovers not winning it.
 

Silent Bob

Tiger Superstar
Nov 7, 2003
1,836
0
Bill James said:
Ultimately the main reaons is Hawthorn kick more goals than their direct opponents more often. However there are a couple of stats that are symptomatic of why.

CONTESTED POSESSIONS
Hawthorn ranks 18th for CP differential vs their direct opponent. On average they have 15 less CP's than their opponents.
On our side Hardwick is obsessed with winning the CP count.

ONE PERCENTERS (spoils, smothers, shepherds and knock-ons)
Hawthorn ranks 1st for 1%er differential vs their direct opponent. They average 11 more 1%ers than their opponent.
Richmond ranks 18th for 1%er differential vs direct opponents. We average 7 fewer 1%ers than our opponent.

Personally I think these stats are related. You can choose to take a contested ball which might work but probably results in a stoppage or worse a free against, or you can choose to knock on and keep the team moving. Clearly Hawthorn is more willing to knock the ball onto advantage than take a dodgy contested possession.

There is a difference between winning a contest (good) and creating contests (bad). Surely it is obvious that hitting someone on his own inside 50 is a better avenue to goal than kicking to a contest.
Interesting stat wild Bill.
 

doherz

Tiger Superstar
Apr 24, 2004
2,336
2
Tigerland
www.informtech.com.au
Bill James said:
Ultimately the main reaons is Hawthorn kick more goals than their direct opponents more often. However there are a couple of stats that are symptomatic of why.

CONTESTED POSESSIONS
Hawthorn ranks 18th for CP differential vs their direct opponent. On average they have 15 less CP's than their opponents.
On our side Hardwick is obsessed with winning the CP count.

ONE PERCENTERS (spoils, smothers, shepherds and knock-ons)
Hawthorn ranks 1st for 1%er differential vs their direct opponent. They average 11 more 1%ers than their opponent.
Richmond ranks 18th for 1%er differential vs direct opponents. We average 7 fewer 1%ers than our opponent.

Personally I think these stats are related. You can choose to take a contested ball which might work but probably results in a stoppage or worse a free against, or you can choose to knock on and keep the team moving. Clearly Hawthorn is more willing to knock the ball onto advantage than take a dodgy contested possession.

There is a difference between winning a contest (good) and creating contests (bad). Surely it is obvious that hitting someone on his own inside 50 is a better avenue to goal than kicking to a contest.

Clarko would be an absolute magician getting 40 blokes buy into this. Think of how the conversation goes.
"Righto lads, let the other mob win the footy and get first possession. But make sure you smash em. Then we'll pickup the loose footy and score from there"

Goes against everything that's ingrained to a junior from day one. Winning your own footy.
If this is a singular facet to their plan, kudos Clarkson for getting buy in. No other coach could.

But I think you're over simplifying it. It'll be plan A, b, c and d. Machinations of each, each week depending on the team they're playing.

This is what we don't have. We have plan a. It doesn't work.
 

Nico

You psychopathological reactionary!
Jul 1, 2004
2,274
2,059
Melbourne
Hawks have max. 4 year terms for board members, whereas RFC board members can stay as long as apathetic RFC members keep them in. We have a number of board members who have been there for 10+ years. Hawthorn continuously refresh, bring in fresh ideas, skills. There's no coups (bloodless or otherwise) as you have 4 years to have a crack and make a difference, and then you're given a bottle of red and thanked for your contribution.

Fixed terms were recently voted against by the RFC board. Fancy that! This has to be voted for by the MEMBERS!

If the RFC had fixed terms, there would not be one board member still around who ratified the appointments of DH, BG, and FJ. No allies, no mates, just board members making decisions as how the RFC is going to win their next premiership.

Mark my words, fixed terms for board members will radically change the culture at the RFC as the goal of board members will be to make a positive difference, rather than be re-elected.

Apologies for discussing non-football issues on this thread, but I am passionate about this issue.
 

asian tetley

Tiger Superstar
Jul 5, 2012
2,330
198
Nico said:
Hawks have max. 4 year terms for board members, whereas RFC board members can stay as long as apathetic RFC members keep them in. We have a number of board members who have been there for 10+ years. Hawthorn continuously refresh, bring in fresh ideas, skills. There's no coups (bloodless or otherwise) as you have 4 years to have a crack and make a difference, and then you're given a bottle of red and thanked for your contribution.

Fixed terms were recently voted against by the RFC board. Fancy that! This has to be voted for by the MEMBERS!

If the RFC had fixed terms, there would not be one board member still around who ratified the appointments of DH, BG, and FJ. No allies, no mates, just board members making decisions as how the RFC is going to win their next premiership.

Mark my words, fixed terms for board members will radically change the culture at the RFC as the goal of board members will be to make a positive difference, rather than be re-elected.

Apologies for discussing non-football issues on this thread, but I am passionate about this issue.

No need to apologise Nico.
You are right.
Peggy the Pres voted against fixed terms for board members.
That is bad bad news.
How did she get away with that?
 

TigerFurious

Smooth
Dec 17, 2002
3,578
4,719
Hawthorn exists to win their next premiership.

Richmond just want to make finals and maintain stability.
 
E

easy_tiger

Guest
Nico said:
Hawks have max. 4 year terms for board members, whereas RFC board members can stay as long as apathetic RFC members keep them in. We have a number of board members who have been there for 10+ years. Hawthorn continuously refresh, bring in fresh ideas, skills. There's no coups (bloodless or otherwise) as you have 4 years to have a crack and make a difference, and then you're given a bottle of red and thanked for your contribution.

really interesting Nico. didnt know that. Ive agitated for fixed termes for committee and coaches at grass roots level, so Im with you.

another thing the Hawks do very well, is manage to meet interstate sides in grand finals. 8-
 

HR

Tiger Superstar
Mar 20, 2013
2,441
1,517
doherz said:
Clarko would be an absolute magician getting 40 blokes buy into this. Think of how the conversation goes.
"Righto lads, let the other mob win the footy and get first possession. But make sure you smash em. Then we'll pickup the loose footy and score from there"

Goes against everything that's ingrained to a junior from day one. Winning your own footy.
If this is a singular facet to their plan, kudos Clarkson for getting buy in. No other coach could.

But I think you're over simplifying it. It'll be plan A, b, c and d. Machinations of each, each week depending on the team they're playing.

This is what we don't have. We have plan a. It doesn't work.
Doherz it is to simplistic to deny that this is not an important part of the hawks game. The fact is in the stats so it is real.
William this is a pretty cool indication.
The fact that they dont win their ball as a CP just says they are more intent on impeding their opponents disposal or attempt at possession. If you then win the numbers game and knock a ball to an areas that you own it doesnt take a CP and your own disposal will more likely be unimpeded.
It is something that you see in their style but i had not been able to understand the basis.
Thanks Bill.
 

Tigertough1974

Tiger Champion
Oct 1, 2013
2,845
916
Id hazard to say they dont start threads asking how we can copy other clubs best practices, they would already be doing them and seek to be the initiator..
 

tommystigers

Don't Boo! It is hurtful to the inept and corrupt.
Oct 6, 2004
4,443
2,334
Hawthorn: Are in the eight at the halfway mark and finish in a position of strength.
Richmond: Are outside the eight at the halfway mark, scramble to make the eight, and have no clue what to do if they get there.

Hawthorn: Exist to win football games and premierships.
Richmond: Exist to...ummm...errr...We're a community organisation, no?

Hawthorn: Win the unwinnable.
Richmond: Lose the unloseable.

Hawthorn: Have hope based in reality.
Richmond: Have reality based in hopelessness.