You can call it a draw Blueworld. I call it a loss. My $20.00 for Essendon* finishing last should have been sewed up on Saturday. We should have absolutely spanked them. The amount of goals we give away is just mind boggling and it always seems to be the usual suspects.

You can add Houlihan, Waite and Fisher to my list. Hell, it's probably easier to list the blokes in our side who CAN kick.

I'm not convinced it's a decision making problem either. Sometimes the idea is the right one but the execution is flawed.

I don't care who we draft this year so long as the bloke can kick.

_________________
If you'd given me the choice of going out and beating four men and smashing a goal in from thirty yards against Liverpool
or going to bed with Miss World, it would have been a difficult choice. Luckily, I had both. - George Best

Fevola
Murphy
Betts
Scotland
Whitnall
Russell
Kennedy
Simpson
Lappin
Blackwell

ONLY ONES WHO DON'T(as a rule)
TOOK LESS TIME

_________________
"I'll tell you what I didn't do;
I never injected anyone."
AD 3/3/14

Cannot believe that nobody has as yet mentioned Adam Bentick in the same breath as Carrazzo when it comes to butchering the ball.
He gets the ball ok, but what he does with it is abominable to say the very least. Simply not up to AFL standard, and is barely saved by his ability to find the ball.....and l mean barely!

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

i know stats dont mean much but clangers can be very costly. here's a list of the of the chief offenders against Essendon*:

A Koutoufides/N Stevens 7

A Bentick 4

R Houlihan/S o'Hailpin/B Fevola 3

NOTES:
good to see walker isnt in there for a change

kade simpson had 22 disposals and not one clanger

we mentioned adam bentick and cory mcgrath earlier in this thread both had no clangers 21 and 20 disposals respectively.

keep in mind this is only 1 match and isnt a true reflection of what players normally dispose of the ball by.

_________________
Last edited by true_blue3 on Mon Sep 26, 1981 5:07 pm; edited 92 times in total

I'm not sure how "Clangers" are defined.

Maybe a clanger doesn't include mistakes that directly result in an opposition goal?

I'm not about to watch a replay of the game but I'm sure a shoddy handball by McGrath in the middle of the ground was collected by Essendon* and directly resulted in a goal. I also seem to recall Walker was running along the wing and kicked it directly to an Essendon* player.

_________________
If you'd given me the choice of going out and beating four men and smashing a goal in from thirty yards against Liverpool
or going to bed with Miss World, it would have been a difficult choice. Luckily, I had both. - George Best

a clanger is a disposal that is directly turned over for example if walker kicks it and lucas marks it its a clanger to walker. and what you said about walker kicking it directly to an opposition player is probly right, i didnt say walker had no clangers i just said it was good that he wasnt on that list he had 2 clangers for the game.

_________________
Last edited by true_blue3 on Mon Sep 26, 1981 5:07 pm; edited 92 times in total

It's not all about stats though BW. They can be incredibly misleading.

_________________
Congratulations CK95

Forget the stats look at the players you need to improve their kicking
Bentick
O'Hailpin
Walker
French
Carrazzo
Koutoufidies(bit late now but most overrated kick ever)
Fisher
Whitnall(not bad but hooks every kick)
Waite( a shocking kick)

Then there are the guys who can kick but decisionmaking is shit
Bannister
Stevens (at times)
McGrath


No wonder we have won 6.5 out of 38.Practice makes perfect.Keep working on it boys.Because it costs us 8 points in the last 2 weeks

Who do you think has now had the most clangers?

I think a lot of people can only remember the mistakes players make when most of the time they get it right.

Im sure most of you know that BW is right. If Houla gets it 25 times and shanks it 3 times, then has he done his job? I know that his second half delivery was very good on the weekend, after a few miskicks in the first.

And well he made me laugh most of the weekend after his Campo tackle so he's OK by me.

But how do we assess this? I dont trust clanger counts. To me they seem to ingore many kicks that dont quite directly turnover (my understanding of the definition) and exclude kicks that dont go to advantage and ultimately turn it over.

Of course I'm right. I wan't referring to anyone in particular.

You can look at effective kicks but the easy way to boost that is to chip it around under no pressure. When Livo has the highest effectiveness I'm not sure how meaningful they are either.

Some of their mistakes are basic. For example Waite's kick for goal at the city end in the 3rd quarter. He was walking sideways as he approached the goal!! I know he was trying to open the angle but the angle was not that bad and he wasn't far out!! It's just so frustrating. Waite does not have the skill to be stuffing around attempting tricks like that. Pretty sure he was dragged after it - as he should have been!

When has he ever done the basics??
I wonder what his trade value is worth???

Molsey makes a good point.

If the definition of a clanger is a direct disposal to the opposition then that only picks up a fraction of the disposal mistakes that the side is currently making.

There are:

* kicks that miss the man on the lead
* kicks to the wrong side of a contest
* hospital passes
* not finding a man positioned by himself
* most shots at goal from under 40 metres

and one of my favourite non-clanger

* handballs to team-mates only 1-2 metres away who have no hope of getting out of a contest

If the definition of a clanger is broadened to "not disposing of the football to the teams full advantage" then I'd hate to think what our clanger count would be but I would be interested in seeing which player ends up with the most

_________________
Carlton - Nothing's changed
I still love you, oh, I still love you
Only slightly, only slightly less
Than I used to, my love

BW, the Scotland figure indicates that pure stats do not always give the correct situation. If you only count clangers then Scotlands score may not look too good. But the fact that he is in the top 3 in the AFL for possessions means that even if he had a low count on turnovers/clangers per possession he would still have a high number.
eg... if a player had 80 possessions for the year to date and had 20 clangers he might be low in the ranking for clangers. Another player might have 25 clangers for the year but have 500 possessions. In the first instance the player would have a 25% clanger rating, in the second even with more clangers would only have a 5% clanger rating.
Does this make sense??? Jarusa, please HELP!

_________________
“Before you criticise someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticise them, you're a mile a way and you have their shoes."

McGrath makes the worst decisions game in game out. He is the dumbest footballer playing AFL and I am at a loss as to how he continually gets away with his woeful decision making. He almost cost us the game with that ridiculous hamdball back into the centre corridor. I thought the coaches went thru each player and their clangers every week? How come he makes the same ones week in week out and gets rewarded by being played whilst the club could promote a rookie and give him a go. McGath is not the future and is a prime example of how the match committee tolerate crap disposal wek in week out without consequences. Understandable in a yougster not someone who is 25.

I don't know - if we draft a couple of kids who are 11 foot tall and stick them in the forward line we'll be hitting them on the chest consistantly with our delivery!!

_________________
If meat is murder then yoghurt must be burglary
GO YOU BIG RED FIRE ENGINE
Move aside Kouta, Lance etc - you're holding us back... from entering the under 18s

Absolutely. That's why I calculated the percentages, though I missed Scotland. His rate is 11% which is actually fairly low. Anyway I think his position as the top clanger maker in the AFL might have been taken over by a team mate of his who wears #24. His rate is 13%. Still better than a few other players who get less of the ball though.

Others:

Walker 16%
Whitnall 13%
Houla 11%
Kouta 18%
Bentick 13%
Simpson 11%
Carrazzo 11%
Thornton 10% (has less risky possessions)
McGrath 13%
De Luca 19%
Wiggins 11%
French 16%
Waite 19%
Fisher 22%
Teague 23%
McLaren 11%
O'halpin 25%
Bannister 8%
Sporn 17%
Blackwell 7%