TalkingCarlton http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
Opposition Performance (2000-2005) http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6668 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | Jarusa [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 3:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Opposition Performance (2000-2005) |
All the data below is what the opposition did against Carlton. So in other words, if it says marks that means how many marks our opposition took. The data from 2000 to 2005 is pretty interesting. ![]() This year was by far our worst year with respect to the other team getting the ball. ![]() Again 2005 the worst. ![]() The tackles data is interesting, I suppose if you don't get the ball you cannot get tackled. ![]() I'm not sure if there is some error here. Did we really only allow less than 20 opposition hitouts per game in 2000-2001. The blowout here is quite amazing. ![]() The clearances data reflects the hitouts data. ![]() It certainly would be easier as a defender if the ball was not coming in as often. Interesting that this year was not too much different to 2003-2004. ![]() This stat will be reflected across many others (is contested footy dead?). ![]() The drop off in contested marking is quite pronounced. From about 28 down to 10. ![]() Again, contested disposals way down. ![]() Less contests, less 1%ers, now there are less of them are they even more important. ![]() Welcome to error free footy, these numbers are dropping as well. ![]() Big jump in bounces, an indication of less pressure on the opposition players? ![]() 6 years ago one in every 4 marks was contested, now it is only 1 in every 10! ![]() ![]() 1 in every 4 possessions was contested 6 years ago, now it is one in every 8. These stats really do show that the game has been changing rapidly over the last few years. All I can say is ![]() Data from Pro-Stats. |
Author: | molsey [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 3:10 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Jarusa can you post possessions, marks and inside 50's in the 2004 to 2005 post? They really add to that discussion. Fascinating stats - looks like the defenders really did go backwards rather than just struggle under the added weight of increased forward entries? Contested ball + bounces data is very interesting - lower levels of pressure as our midfield are unable to apply the blowtorch. Or any other sort of torch. |
Author: | Blue Vain [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 3:36 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
A more telling indication Molsey would be how AFL teams collectively fare. I'd be surprised if Carlton suffer this trend alone. I'd suspect these stats indicate the change of gamestyle for most teams. Since Brisbane became a power house, opposition teams realised kicking the ball to contests suited the Brisbane "moving defensive wall". Uncontested tempo football is the only remedy to flooding until something better comes along. |
Author: | Sydney Blue [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 3:41 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Blue Vain wrote: A more telling indication Molsey would be how AFL teams collectively fare.
I'd be surprised if Carlton suffer this trend alone. I'd suspect these stats indicate the change of gamestyle for most teams. Since Brisbane became a power house, opposition teams realised kicking the ball to contests suited the Brisbane "moving defensive wall". Uncontested tempo football is the only remedy to flooding until something better comes along. Can some one please send this info to DP and let him know the Game is changing before we have to suffer further years of floggings and list blaming |
Author: | dannyboy [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
what we have a good list? |
Author: | Effes [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 5:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Sydney Blue wrote: Blue Vain wrote: A more telling indication Molsey would be how AFL teams collectively fare. I'd be surprised if Carlton suffer this trend alone. I'd suspect these stats indicate the change of gamestyle for most teams. Since Brisbane became a power house, opposition teams realised kicking the ball to contests suited the Brisbane "moving defensive wall". Uncontested tempo football is the only remedy to flooding until something better comes along. Can some one please send this info to DP and let him know the Game is changing before we have to suffer further years of floggings and list blaming Sydney, Are you implying that all we do is kick the ball long inside 50? |
Author: | jbee [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
dannyboy wrote: what we have a good list?
According to Sydney we have! |
Author: | Sydney Blue [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:45 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
jbee wrote: dannyboy wrote: what we have a good list? According to Sydney we have! Its getting better but it wasn't bad before. Tell me fellars all this delisting of players and trading away our players were has it got us. Pagan led sides always give commitment Pagan led sides always provide a contest You expect side led by Pagan to bounce back What a load of crap. Name the side with the list that will win next years flag. One of you might fluke it |
Author: | dannyboy [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:52 am ] |
Post subject: | |
its getting better but it wasn't bad before... so LB do you believe with a 'better' coach we'd be pushing for the 8, the top 6, the top 4 or what? |
Author: | molsey [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:56 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Blue Vain wrote: A more telling indication Molsey would be how AFL teams collectively fare.
I'd be surprised if Carlton suffer this trend alone. I'd suspect these stats indicate the change of gamestyle for most teams. Since Brisbane became a power house, opposition teams realised kicking the ball to contests suited the Brisbane "moving defensive wall". Uncontested tempo football is the only remedy to flooding until something better comes along. You're right BV - was more thinking of 2004 to 2005 given my parallel post about goal scoring for / against us in those two years. Trying to find if any stats support the idea that our defence went backwards - it looks as though D50 entries went up a little, also opposition scoring shots went up alot, but perhaps contested marks needs to be split into those in the D50 and elsewhere for me to try to link those. |
Author: | CarltonClem [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:41 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Sydney Blue wrote: jbee wrote: dannyboy wrote: what we have a good list? According to Sydney we have! Its getting better but it wasn't bad before. Tell me fellars all this delisting of players and trading away our players were has it got us. Pagan led sides always give commitment Pagan led sides always provide a contest You expect side led by Pagan to bounce back What a load of crap. Name the side with the list that will win next years flag. One of you might fluke it The difference between direct and "bombing long" seems to be lost on people... |
Author: | Sydney Blue [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:46 am ] |
Post subject: | |
CarltonClem wrote: Sydney Blue wrote: jbee wrote: dannyboy wrote: what we have a good list? According to Sydney we have! Its getting better but it wasn't bad before. Tell me fellars all this delisting of players and trading away our players were has it got us. Pagan led sides always give commitment Pagan led sides always provide a contest You expect side led by Pagan to bounce back What a load of crap. Name the side with the list that will win next years flag. One of you might fluke it The difference between direct and "bombing long" seems to be lost on people... If we were direct the chances are we would recieve the ball once it was delivered . We dont so there for we must bomb it . So who is lost |
Author: | jbee [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:03 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Sydney Blue wrote: jbee wrote: dannyboy wrote: what we have a good list? According to Sydney we have! Its getting better but it wasn't bad before. Tell me fellars all this delisting of players and trading away our players were has it got us. Pagan led sides always give commitment Pagan led sides always provide a contest You expect side led by Pagan to bounce back What a load of crap. Name the side with the list that will win next years flag. One of you might fluke it Sydney, You are very insightful. Which players have we delisted that have come back to haunt us? Which players did we trade that have come back to haunt us? Pagan has had 3 years at the club and only one year to compete on level terms with every other club in the competition at the draft. That year was last year. The flag will come from West Coast, StKilda or Adelaide. |
Author: | Chitty's Finger [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:06 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Allan played 2 good games for Essendon* which is more than we got from Mott. Beaumont played 4-5 good solid defensive games which is more than we got for Clarke. Eccles was fantastic for North Ballarat in 2004. ![]() |
Author: | Sydney Blue [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:55 am ] |
Post subject: | |
jbee wrote: Sydney Blue wrote: jbee wrote: dannyboy wrote: what we have a good list? According to Sydney we have! Its getting better but it wasn't bad before. Tell me fellars all this delisting of players and trading away our players were has it got us. Pagan led sides always give commitment Pagan led sides always provide a contest You expect side led by Pagan to bounce back What a load of crap. Name the side with the list that will win next years flag. One of you might fluke it Sydney, You are very insightful. Which players have we delisted that have come back to haunt us? Which players did we trade that have come back to haunt us? Pagan has had 3 years at the club and only one year to compete on level terms with every other club in the competition at the draft. That year was last year. The flag will come from West Coast, StKilda or Adelaide. Hedging your bets there with the flag winner for next year picking from three. Jbee my disgust with the way the administration has handled the last three years is not by who left and who we got- it was the way it was done. We could have kept Allan and Beaumont and Murphy and Mckernan etc and still be in ths same position we are in now . But instead of those players retiring at other clubs they could have gone gracefully at our club. Hell if we had held on to them maybe we might have finished last and picked up Deledio and Tambling and wouldn't that been good |
Author: | jbee [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:55 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote: Allan played 2 good games for Essendon* which is more than we got from Mott.
Beaumont played 4-5 good solid defensive games which is more than we got for Clarke. Eccles was fantastic for North Ballarat in 2004. ![]() I'm convinced lets sack Denis. |
Author: | Chitty's Finger [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:02 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Gone gracefully? So your concern isn't for the trading itself, but that players finished up their careers on their lonesome at other clubs? Thats just not a big concern is it, isnt that a romantic notion of some type that doesnt exist in football anymore? Im much happier that McKernan ended his career at the rooes on 400 thousand big ones in the SECONDS than on 400 big ones for the BULLANTS. Its just a ridiculous argument that I'm proud of you for creating - could never have thought that one up in a million years. |
Author: | Sydney Blue [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:08 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote: Gone gracefully? So your concern isn't for the trading itself, but that players finished up their careers on their lonesome at other clubs?
Thats just not a big concern is it, isnt that a romantic notion of some type that doesnt exist in football anymore? Im much happier that McKernan ended his career at the rooes on 400 thousand big ones in the SECONDS than on 400 big ones for the BULLANTS. Its just a ridiculous argument that I'm proud of you for creating - could never have thought that one up in a million years. Its a big concern now because we cannot attract big name players to our club anymore. Hell even Bolton didn't want to play for us. It will take a little time but the penny will drop eventually and you will see what the real cause and effect is |
Author: | Chitty's Finger [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:15 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Sydney Blue wrote: Athorn the Wonderkid wrote: Gone gracefully? So your concern isn't for the trading itself, but that players finished up their careers on their lonesome at other clubs? Thats just not a big concern is it, isnt that a romantic notion of some type that doesnt exist in football anymore? Im much happier that McKernan ended his career at the rooes on 400 thousand big ones in the SECONDS than on 400 big ones for the BULLANTS. Its just a ridiculous argument that I'm proud of you for creating - could never have thought that one up in a million years. Its a big concern now because we cannot attract big name players to our club anymore. Hell even Bolton didn't want to play for us. It will take a little time but the penny will drop eventually and you will see what the real cause and effect is Why do you believe Sheedy over the Club? Why would you want Bolton at the Club? Why is Bolton related to trading McKernan back to the poor old hole he came from? |
Author: | Sydney Blue [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:18 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote: Sydney Blue wrote: Athorn the Wonderkid wrote: Gone gracefully? So your concern isn't for the trading itself, but that players finished up their careers on their lonesome at other clubs? Thats just not a big concern is it, isnt that a romantic notion of some type that doesnt exist in football anymore? Im much happier that McKernan ended his career at the rooes on 400 thousand big ones in the SECONDS than on 400 big ones for the BULLANTS. Its just a ridiculous argument that I'm proud of you for creating - could never have thought that one up in a million years. Its a big concern now because we cannot attract big name players to our club anymore. Hell even Bolton didn't want to play for us. It will take a little time but the penny will drop eventually and you will see what the real cause and effect is Why do you believe Sheedy over the Club? Why would you want Bolton at the Club? Why is Bolton related to trading McKernan back to the poor old hole he came from? If it was only Sheedy you may have a point but the fact remains every big named player linked to Carlton eventually signed with their own club. We were in prime position this year and got no one. |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |