League Lowest Record

[bulldogproud]

Ecky, the stats definition The Advertiser use is the same one the SANFL and AFL prescribe. Cheers

[MAY-Z]

Ecky, the stats definition The Advertiser use is the same one the SANFL and AFL prescribe. Cheers

no its not, the afl have numerous qualifiers
they record all hit outs, and then have qualifiers such as whether or not it was to advantage or not.

[Ecky]

Yep, sorry BDP but May-Z is correct. I just double-checked with a statistical analyst at one of the AFL clubs and got this response

A hitout is a hitout, regardless of where it goes. It then get's subcategorized as "Effective", "Ineffective", "To Advantage", "Sharked" etc etc.

This is what Champion Data - who do the stats for all AFL clubs and the AFL website use.
So if the Advertiser is going to have a column called "hitouts", they really need to include all hitouts if they want to be consistent with the AFL.

[Blue Boy]

Yep, sorry BDP but May-Z is correct. I just double-checked with a statistical analyst at one of the AFL clubs and got this response

A hitout is a hitout, regardless of where it goes. It then get's subcategorized as "Effective", "Ineffective", "To Advantage", "Sharked" etc etc.

This is what Champion Data - who do the stats for all AFL clubs and the AFL website use.
So if the Advertiser is going to have a column called "hitouts", they really need to include all hitouts if they want to be consistent with the AFL.

Advertiser vs Consistent = Yeah Right

[bulldogproud]

Guys, the official stats in the AFL though (AFL administration not the individual clubs) record their stats exactly the same as The Advertiser and the SANFL do. Individual clubs may differ but that is because they seek different information from their statistics.
Cheers

[MAY-Z]

Guys, the official stats in the AFL though (AFL administration not the individual clubs) record their stats exactly the same as The Advertiser and the SANFL do. Individual clubs may differ but that is because they seek different information from their statistics.
Cheers

as i said previously no they dont- check the advertiser/ herald sun for a start which have the hit out stats for the top 2 for each team- this is the total hit outs each ruckman got regardless of their effectiveness. Next to this number they have a percentage which shows how many of these hitouts were effetcive.

[Ecky]

Guys, the official stats in the AFL though (AFL administration not the individual clubs) record their stats exactly the same as The Advertiser and the SANFL do. Individual clubs may differ but that is because they seek different information from their statistics.
Cheers

as i said previously no they dont- check the advertiser/ herald sun for a start which have the hit out stats for the top 2 for each team- this is the total hit outs each ruckman got regardless of their effectiveness. Next to this number they have a percentage which shows how many of these hitouts were effetcive.

Sorry BDP but you are just digging a bigger hole for yourself. If you don't believe us, have a look at this link.

http://www.championdata.com.au/faq.html#view_statistics

You may have been correct a few years ago, but not now - Champion Data have the monopoly on both the "official" AFL stats, and the stats all the clubs use.

[spell_check]

Guys, the official stats in the AFL though (AFL administration not the individual clubs) record their stats exactly the same as The Advertiser and the SANFL do. Individual clubs may differ but that is because they seek different information from their statistics.
Cheers

as i said previously no they dont- check the advertiser/ herald sun for a start which have the hit out stats for the top 2 for each team- this is the total hit outs each ruckman got regardless of their effectiveness. Next to this number they have a percentage which shows how many of these hitouts were effetcive.

Which is a much better way of presenting them - both the dominance of a ruckman and if it was effective or not.

[Ecky]

This is Champion Data's (and hence the AFL's) official definition of a hitout:

Where clear control was evident from either player contesting the ruck contest regardless of which side cleared the contest.

[bulldogproud]

Ecky, thanks for that. Please note the words 'CLEAR CONTROL'. Hence, as stated previously not all hitouts are counted officially.

Cheers

[bulldogproud]

Gets the spade out for the hole he has dug himself.
I guess we were both half-right on this one. I stated that not all hitouts are counted, and that was correct. However, I was wrong in saying that they had to be to the advantage of the team. All that we need do though is change the column in the paper to Effective Hitouts.

Cheers

[Wedgie]

Gets the spade out for the hole he has dug himself.
I guess we were both half-right on this one. I stated that not all hitouts are counted, and that was correct. However, I was wrong in saying that they had to be to the advantage of the team. All that we need do though is change the column in the paper to Effective Hitouts.

Cheers

I disagree, by the definition of above if a ruckman clearly is trying to tap it in a forward motion by the position of his hand and it goes forward but to an opposition player its still a hitout, I'd hardly deem it an effective hitout though. Its fine and self explanatory as it is.
The real interest in the stat that I have is how many times the ruckman beat his opposition player and that's what it shows now, perhaps if there's call for another stat to see how many of those are effective add a new column.

[bulldogproud]

Wedgie,

I agree with you 90% of the time, but I believe a ruckman would not want to know how many times he got his hand to the ball first but how many times he actually gained advantage for his team. Getting your hand to the ball is minor compared to the skill of actually getting it to one of your teammates. I would hate to have ruckmen who did not worry about where the ball went, just as long as they got the tap.
Cheers

[Wedgie]

Wedgie,

I agree with you 90% of the time, but I believe a ruckman would not want to know how many times he got his hand to the ball first but how many times he actually gained advantage for his team. Getting your hand to the ball is minor compared to the skill of actually getting it to one of your teammates. I would hate to have ruckmen who did not worry about where the ball went, just as long as they got the tap.
Cheers

I disagree getting your hand on the ball is minor, its the major part of the rucking as if you don't get your hand on it your rovers have no chance of getting the ball if playing to your advantage as a ruckman.
Im sure all/most ruckman do care about where the ball goes otherwise they wouldn't get a game but there's many more skills to the art of rucking.
Geting hand on the ball is the most important but even just competing and ensuring the opposition ruckman doesn't get the tap or hurting the other ruckman are also important skills asked by the coach at time.
I spent over 5 years doing it and sometimes got in the best players despite hardly tapping a ball to a rover.

[bulldogproud]

Wedgie,

Central won a Grand Final by a record winning margin but lost 75% of the ruck contests in terms of getting the hand to the ball first. It is no good getting your hand to the ball unless you can get it to advantange. Good teams can set up their roving division in such a way as to nullify a team's ruckman unless he is extremely skillful at placement.
To me the value of a ruckman is not so much in getting the hand to the ball, but placement of taps and also general work around the ground. That is why I rate McKenzie at Central extremely highly.
I suppose we all have our own individual ways of assessing things though.
Cheers

[JK]

It is no good getting your hand to the ball unless you can get it to advantange.

This is not entirely true, because by getting your hand to the ball first you should be able to prevent your opposition from potentially putting it anywhere he likes.

I see your point and agree that as a ruckmen you would be most concerned by how advantageous your tap work is, but there are times when it is considered a win to just prevent your opponent having first use.

[bulldogproud]

Yes, but can that advantage be gained by your rovers roving to the opposition ruckmen? That is part of the reason for Central being dominant these past seven years. We have rarely won the hitouts on a full game basis, but we dominate the clearances.
Cheers

[JK]

Yes, but can that advantage be gained by your rovers roving to the opposition ruckmen? That is part of the reason for Central being dominant these past seven years. We have rarely won the hitouts on a full game basis, but we dominate the clearances.
Cheers

Sometimes ... it can be gained when your oballers are as good as yours.

Varies from week to week (and sometimes quarter to quarter) on personnel, but a dominant big man being nullified is a win for the opposition, as it also is if your onballers are still good enough to create the clearances regardless of who wins the taps.

IMHO, Scoullar was an exceptional player for you guys and always seemed to have a healthy impact against the Legs, although that was more his positioning and marking in general play.

[bulldogproud]

Agreed re Scoullar. McKenzie is in the same mould too. CP, study a game in full and see how few knockouts actually do favour the team whose ruckman wins the tap. I think most people would be surprised if they did this. To me, knock ruckman are over-rated. It is the general field work around the ground that makes a key big man valuable. Then again, that is just my humble opinion.
Cheers!

[JK]

I generally pay a fair amount of attention to the ruck contests BP, as it was where I used to play so perhaps holds the most interest for me.

I do agree there is very little clear advantage given in hit-outs these days, some via non-clearly directed taps and some through midfielders not being in the correct spots (for whatever reason).

I must admit I usually pay more attention to the body positioning (and some of the ridiculous free's they pay when two blokes are just having a fair dinkum jostle) than the actual palmwork.

Still think Ruckmen play a very important role in the clearances .. Take a bloke like Lindsay (Scoullar was another who could do this) - He could virtually let the ball go, but in overrunning it, his body blocks oncoming traffic and creates the necessary space for his midfielders behind him.

A lot of people used to get annoyed with the tactics of Darryl Poole who, lacking in height compared to most accomplished ruckmen, would jump early to take away their advantage - smart and important football.